TNA/WWE Ratings in the UK and US

D2D

I have an awful feeling that this might spiral off topic so Mods can close this at any time if it does.

Just thought I'd let ye know what the ratings were between WWE and TNA

In the UK - Source http://www.wrestleview.com/news2009/1260424735.php?style=dark

For the Week Nov 23 - 29

Bravo
TNA Impact was below 37,000 viewers

Sky Sports 3
5. WWE SmackDown - Friday 10:31PM - 64,000 viewers
6. WWE SmackDown (Replay) - Saturday 9:01AM - 47,000 viewers
7. WWE Raw (Nov 16 Replay) - Monday 5:00PM - 44,000 viewers
9. WWE Raw Live - Tuesday 2AM - 42,000 Viewers

All other programming on Sky Sports 3 fell below 41,000 viewers

in the US last week - http://www.wrestleview.com/news2009/1260425060.php?style=dark and http://www.wrestleview.com/news2009/1260394039.php

WWE and TNA ratings courtesy of The Wrestling Observer Newsletter:

TNA Impact on 12/3 drew a final 1.2 cable rating (rounded up from a 1.15) with 1.3 million viewers. It was falsely reported earlier as a 1.0 rating. The show did a 0.72 in males 18-34 and 0.68 in males 35-49.

WWE Superstars on 12/3 drew a final 0.8 cable rating.

ECW on SyFy on 12/1 drew a final 1.0 cable rating.

Friday Night Smackdown on 11/27 did a 2.1 broadcast rating.

WWE Monday Night Raw on 11/30 drew a final 3.2 cable rating (rounded up from a 3.18). The first hour drew 4.8 million viewers, while the second hour drew 4.5 million viewers. So yet another drop in the second hour for the show.

Degag

Jeez, the ammount of people watching in the uk seems tiny...

Wompa1

Do they do the rating basing one tv as one person watching?

D2D

Degag wrote: »

Jeez, the ammount of people watching in the uk seems tiny...

I'm not really surprised with WWE's ratings seeing that Sky Sports is pay-tv. TNA on Bravo on the other hand should be a bit higher up seeing as Bravo is free-to-view and more people have access to it

Machismo Fan

Occasionally TNA does get 40-60 thousand in the UK (and occasionally beats WWE).

EdK

Pay tv or not those numbers are nothing,between all the sky sports subscibers UK and Ireland thats all that watch WWE?

Bounty Hunter

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Occasionally TNA does get 40-60 thousand in the UK (and occasionally beats WWE).

WWE does spread its UK ratings around quite a bit though with its multiple showings of shows at different times during the week does it not? as not everyone watches live at 2am for example

JP Liz

TNA Impact is also shown on Virgin 1 now on Friday nights

Machismo Fan

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

WWE does spread its UK ratings around quite a bit though with its multiple showings of shows at different times during the week does it not? as not everyone watches live at 2am for example

TNA also have a number of showings, I'd imagine not all watch on the Saturday night.

citytillidie

JP Liz wrote: »

TNA Impact is also shown on Virgin 1 now on Friday nights

For some reason its not on tonight

jaykhunter

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Occasionally TNA does get 40-60 thousand in the UK (and occasionally beats WWE).

Occasionally beats ECW and Superstars and possibly a single-viewing of RAW (which is split between live and taped) so TNA/Dixie Carter like to 'fudge the facts' to make them seem more important.

I bet the weekly iMPACT beats RAW AM in the states, but that doesn't mean "iMPACT beats RAW"...


:mad:...:rolleyes:

Machismo Fan

jaykhunter wrote: »

Occasionally beats ECW and Superstars and possibly a single-viewing of RAW (which is split between live and taped) so TNA/Dixie Carter like to 'fudge the facts' to make them seem more important.

I bet the weekly iMPACT beats RAW AM in the states, but that doesn't mean "iMPACT beats RAW"...

But TNA undeniably does do better in the UK occasionally than WWE and to say otherwise is unfair to TNA. For example:
http://www.f4wonline.com/content/view/10244/105/

--In the U.K. for the week ending 8/2, Impact was the highest rated pro wrestling show with 70,000 viewers, and did 50,000 on a replay broadcast. Raw did 57,000 viewers for a replay for its highest rating of he week. Smackdown's first airing did 45,000.

On that week it would be extremely unfair to say anything other than TNA were the most watched wrestling show in the UK by long way. At the very least give credit where it's due.

Machismo Fan

citytillidie wrote: »

For some reason its not on tonight

I believe that was only a short term thing as a taster of sorts.

Paulegend

woooooooo cant believe how much smackdown beats raw

dsmythy

Paulegend wrote: »

woooooooo cant believe how much smackdown beats raw

The Saturday morning repeat show is very accessible for the kids.

Rawm2008

From what i rember the ratings system is very biased, its the barb system i think, one viewer with a barb box represents 1000 people or something.

Like thats how TWC etc all died, cause with out ratings due to the barb system no advertisng revienue or something despite the facts thousands could be watching it, if one of them doesnt have the barb box then according to the rating system no one is watching it.

davrho

What i cant make out with the figures is how they dont translate to the customer sales.

WWE sell out approx 10,000 arena's up and down the uk/Ireland yet TNA struggle to sell a couple of thousand tickets. Go into HMV and there is a section of wwe dvd's with the TNA ones stuck in the corner. Same can be said for toy stores. Large parts of floor space is given to wwe and just a corner to TNA. Anyone who works in retail will tell you the floorspace is relevant to sales.

Please dont take this as a fanboy dig at TNA. Its an observation and a visit to any HMV or Smyths will prove this.

So are people willing to watch TNA on tv for free but when it comes to paying for the product they wont?

If I have went off topic then dont bother replying and delete this post. The figures just dont add up.......

TheCandystripes

what do you know abou the sales of tna in uk

davrho

TheCandystripes wrote: »

what do you know abou the sales of tna in uk

Read my post

I would suggest selling approx 10,000 tickets would bring in more money than selling approx 2,000? I would imagine these customers might buy merchandise too?



You were right Dare-2-defy. No point in trying to turn this into debate.

D2D

davrho wrote: »

Read my post

I would suggest selling approx 10,000 tickets would bring in more money than selling approx 2,000? I would imagine these customers might buy merchandise too?



You were right Dare-2-defy. No point in trying to turn this into debate.

My bad, messeage before you deleted. :)

DM_7

davrho wrote: »

What i cant make out with the figures is how they dont translate to the customer sales.

WWE sell out approx 10,000 arena's up and down the uk/Ireland yet TNA struggle to sell a couple of thousand tickets. Go into HMV and there is a section of wwe dvd's with the TNA ones stuck in the corner. Same can be said for toy stores. Large parts of floor space is given to wwe and just a corner to TNA. Anyone who works in retail will tell you the floorspace is relevant to sales.

Please dont take this as a fanboy dig at TNA. Its an observation and a visit to any HMV or Smyths will prove this.

So are people willing to watch TNA on tv for free but when it comes to paying for the product they wont?

If I have went off topic then dont bother replying and delete this post. The figures just dont add up.......

Its a good question.

I think fans are more inclined to pay to see something they usually have to pay for.

They have to pay to see most WWE PPVs so would be more unclined to pay for a DVD.

TNA is free on TV so people are not going to pay to buy something they normally get for free.

Its human nature, If you go to a crap cheap hotel you probably won't care what state you leave the room in. But if you stay in a good expensive one you will probably leave the room in a good condition.

davrho

DM-ICE wrote: »

Its a good question.

I think fans are more inclined to pay to see something they usually have to pay for.

They have to pay to see most WWE PPVs so would be more unclined to pay for a DVD.

TNA is free on TV so people are not going to pay to buy something they normally get for free.

Its human nature, If you go to a crap cheao hotel you probably won't care what state you leave the room in. But if you stay in a good expensive one you will probably leave the room in a good condition.

So you are saying TNA is muck and should be treated as such?

Where do you all get this free tv?

As a bill payer i dont find these free tv channels?

DM_7

davrho wrote: »

So you are saying TNA is muck and should be treated as such?

Where do you all get this free tv?

As a bill payer i dont find these free tv channels?

I'm not saying it deserves to be treated as muck. I am saying I wouldn't buy TNA DVD's when they show it for free on Bravo.

Bravo is part of most sky packages and while its not "free" there are no extra costs to see the PPV.

WWE on the other hand is mostly shown on channels you need an extra subscription for and most PPV's have another extra cost.

davrho

DM-ICE wrote: »

I am saying I wouldn't buy TNA DVD's when they show it for free on Bravo.

Thats what does not add up for me. WWE fans will pay for the ppv then buy the dvd too. Although wwe is slated ,and rightly so, they have customers willing to spend their cash on the product.

non related-As i said in another thread i only watch Celtic, Leinster rugby, South Park and wrestling(sports entertainment) but have to pay 90 euro a month for the pleasure. I would happily lose all the other channels if they dropped the cost. 5 tv channels would suit me fine but I have to pay for 800 channels of pish......

Fozzy

DM-ICE wrote: »

Its a good question.

I think fans are more inclined to pay to see something they usually have to pay for.

They have to pay to see most WWE PPVs so would be more unclined to pay for a DVD.

TNA is free on TV so people are not going to pay to buy something they normally get for free.

Its human nature, If you go to a crap cheap hotel you probably won't care what state you leave the room in. But if you stay in a good expensive one you will probably leave the room in a good condition.

That might make sense except for the fact that it's the very same situation in the US, where they do have to pay for TNA PPVs. They regularly have over a million people watching their shows every week but about 1% of them buy the PPVs

PisteHoff

Fozzy wrote: »

That might make sense except for the fact that it's the very same situation in the US, where they do have to pay for TNA PPVs. They regularly have over a million people watching their shows every week but about 1% of them buy the PPVs[/QUOT

But there is a cost to watching TNA pay per views, its a week late and on bravo and is over four hours long because of the add breaks during it..

waltersobchak

DM-ICE wrote: »

Its a good question.

I think fans are more inclined to pay to see something they usually have to pay for.

They have to pay to see most WWE PPVs so would be more unclined to pay for a DVD.

TNA is free on TV so people are not going to pay to buy something they normally get for free.

Its human nature, If you go to a crap cheap hotel you probably won't care what state you leave the room in. But if you stay in a good expensive one you will probably leave the room in a good condition.

thats a great analogy, i think TNA does well over 70,000 views for they're PPVs on Bravo.. realistically how many people would pay for it?? probably less than 2%