Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Ratings Discussion Thread - Mod Warning #271 (26th June)

24567…12

Comments

  • #32
    J. Marston
    Registered Users Posts: 23,104 ✭✭✭✭J. Marston


    Jerichoholic wrote: »
    The product is really bad, therefore the interest isn't there as it used to be, therefore attendance is down, therefore ratings are down.

    They made the Fox deal during a tiny period where their ratings were actually up a little bit from the same time the previous year and they had just done a deal with Rousey. Fox would not be giving the same deal now with these falling ratings, not a chance.

    Look at the interest in Stomping Grounds, it's not there anymore. The card is absolutely wretched.

    https://twitter.com/TheVicMacias/status/1138108167680741376

    Not surprising. You've got Baron Corbin and Dolph fúcking Ziggler in the marquee matches. I wouldn't cross the road to watch them.


  • #33
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    leggo wrote: »
    Again it’s like you saying that McDonalds is going down the drain because you had one bad experience in one Drive Thru. Right, they’ve lost your business, but they’ll probably be grand and it’s not worth the CEO being called up in the middle of the night. The absolute state of that!

    Do you want sone fries with that waffle?


  • #34
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    Man you’re the one who connected your personal opinion of the product to the ratings. Nobody made you do that, your hand didn’t slip, type out that post and click send by accident. When I said “that’s your personal opinion”, you continued to argue and make smart remarks. Don’t get stubborn, butthurt and keep making smart comments just because you’ve been proven wrong. It’s okay, you just overreacted and made a bad point on the Internet once. This too shall pass.


  • #35
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    My mistake was rising to your absolute self-congratulatory style of posting to be honest. "Butthurt"... who honestly says that?

    I'm off to watch some Adam Bomb vs Kwang, the good ol' days.


  • #36
    lawlolawl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,678 ✭✭✭lawlolawl


    leggo wrote: »
    You got data, that I haven’t published anywhere else, there from an unbiased source with a unique insight into exactly what we’re discussing here. How did you react to that?

    Did you use it to better educate yourself on the thing you’ve spent all morning discussing? Nope, you made a smart comment because the data didn’t back up your point. So you don’t care about facts at all really, you just want your pre-conceived notions backed up.

    Well even if you learned nothing from the data I hope you’ve learned something about yourself this morning.


    The only data available is falling ratings and live show attendance.


    You've posted purely anecdotal evidence.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    lawlolawl wrote: »
    The only data available is falling ratings and live show attendance.


    You've posted purely anecdotal evidence.

    Well there were hundreds of witnesses who can back up everything I said there so...

    But by all means, be the latest generation of those people who said last decade that WWE were dying and TNA were taking over. They all look very clever now.


  • #38
    lawlolawl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,678 ✭✭✭lawlolawl


    leggo wrote: »

    But by all means, be the latest generation of those people who said last decade that WWE were dying and TNA were taking over. They all look very clever now.


    Impacts highest ever TV rating was a 1.5 on 04/01/2010.

    Raw did a 3.6 that night.

    Things have changed.


  • #39
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    lawlolawl wrote: »
    Impacts highest ever TV rating was a 1.5 on 01/03/2010.

    Raw did a 3.6 that night.

    Things have changed.

    Back then they used ratings from The Attitude Era to say the same thing when someone said “Eh lads you said this about WCW in the 90’s...”

    And yet WWE continue to make more money than ever. It’s almost as if something outside of wrestling has changed. Like there was more channels in 2009 than 1999. Or smartphones that have changed how people consume products in 2019...

    I mean, you’re repeating a historically bad argument that has been proven wrong for decades now, but by all means...


  • #40
    Jerichoholic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,585 ✭✭✭Jerichoholic


    leggo wrote: »
    Well there were hundreds of witnesses who can back up everything I said there so...

    But by all means, be the latest generation of those people who said last decade that WWE were dying and TNA were taking over. They all look very clever now.

    You've literally condemned someone for forming an opinion based on personal circumstances and in the same breath presented personal circumstances as facts.

    The facts are quite clear, they are losing viewers every single week. They are doing worse ratings than WCW did when they were cancelled. Sky have just dropped them after 30 years because they aren't getting the viewers anymore.

    You're totally wrong on this one.


  • #41
    lawlolawl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,678 ✭✭✭lawlolawl


    leggo wrote: »
    Back then they used ratings from The Attitude Era to say the same thing when someone said “Eh lads you said this about WCW in the 90’s...”

    I mean, you’re repeating a historically bad argument that has been proven wrong for decades now, but by all means...


    WCW were actually doing similar/slightly better ratings at the end than WWE are doing now.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    lawlolawl wrote: »
    WCW were actually doing similar/slightly better ratings at the end than WWE are doing now.

    What smartphone did people watch content on then? How many channels were there to choose from in 2001 vs 2019?

    Are ratings from then really comparable? Like do you honestly feel that way or are you clutching? If so then why did Fox pay record figures for those ratings when Turner chose to cancel based on them?


  • #43
    Jerichoholic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,585 ✭✭✭Jerichoholic


    leggo wrote: »
    What smartphone did people watch content on then? How many channels were there to choose from in 2001 vs 2019?

    Are ratings from then really comparable? Like do you honestly feel that way or are you clutching? If so then why did Fox pay record figures for those ratings when Turner chose to cancel based on them?

    Explain the 50% drop in 5 years then. Smartphones and youtube were all there then too.


  • #44
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    Jerichoholic wrote: »
    You've literally condemned someone for forming an opinion based on personal circumstances and in the same breath presented personal circumstances as facts.

    Nope, my personal opinion would be that the shows, in order of enjoyment, would be: Rumble, DoN, WK, Mania, Dominion.

    The data presented, that isn’t affected by my personal opinion, says that people’s taste and interest feels otherwise.


  • #45
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    Jerichoholic wrote: »
    Explain the 50% drop in 5 years then. Smartphones and youtube were all there then too.

    That’s how trends work. Technology gets better and more integrated into people’s lives and it gradually lowers usage. It’s not as if Netflix was invented and people threw their TVs out their windows immediately like. It doesn’t kill it overnight. Radio has been bleeding for years as a format but continues to be profitable. Companies are adjusting. Holding WWE responsible for this massive shift in the way people are consuming content is absolutely mental!

    I don’t think people saying it are mental, mind, I just think they’re getting a massively slanted version of the story from an ever more compromised news source and nobody else qualified enough in the field to correct him loudly enough.


  • #46
    lawlolawl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,678 ✭✭✭lawlolawl


    leggo wrote: »
    What smartphone did people watch content on then? How many channels were there to choose from in 2001 vs 2019?

    Are ratings from then really comparable? Like do you honestly feel that way or are you clutching? If so then why did Fox pay record figures for those ratings when Turner chose to cancel based on them?


    You can only watch Raw and Smackdown on the USA Network app.


    This has only a million downloads on the Google Play store and is ranked #157 in "Entertainment" on the Apple app store.


    There isn't a hidden audience of millions that would make up the huge drop in ratings.


  • #47
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    I watched it on Monday on AllWrestling.com tbh. Couldn’t do that in 1999.


  • #48
    lawlolawl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,678 ✭✭✭lawlolawl


    leggo wrote: »
    I watched it on Monday on AllWrestling.com tbh.


    The looks to just be some random wrestling news website.


  • #49
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    lawlolawl wrote: »
    The looks to just be some random wrestling news website.

    For the second time in this discussion I ask...what point do you think you’re making here? Do you even know anymore or are you just arguing with anything anyone who isn’t saying “WWE IS DYING” says at this stage?

    It happened. In 2009, you couldn’t follow Raw by YouTube clips (which can fetch an extra 2-3m viewers). In 1999, you couldn’t stream it. The world is changing and that’s not indicative of WWE dying, as much as you might love to think it is. Meanwhile nobody here can answer why these ‘dying’ ratings make more money than ratings 2-3 times bigger did years ago...except for me accepting the facts as they are.


  • #50
    Sirsok
    Registered Users Posts: 2,790 ✭✭✭Sirsok


    Just watched an interview with George Barrios, alot of what Leggo is saying makes sense, direct to consumer product via the internet seems like their number 1 main focus, just pumping out content that people with eat up.

    I guess these numbers help contribute to deals from fox and the likes going, look at how many people follow our brand.

    Another result of this easy accesability would be the supposed declining house show business. This was always used as a barrometer for WWE success, but maybe not so relevent anymore.

    The product is stale no doubt about that, especially condiering the sheer amount of wrestling we can consume nowadays, maybe this staleness will have a knockon effect in the future with no bonafide stars ala Cena, Taker, Austin etc being able to come back and pop rarings.


  • #51
    ERG89
    Registered Users Posts: 11,611 ✭✭✭✭ERG89


    WWE are like the Simpsons despite being mainly terrible for a very long period of time now they are successful despite the shows being absolute fu*king poison to watch.
    Great for investors that they got the TV deal but as a fan of wrestling I can't take any satisfaction out of it when the product is bad. Viewers must feel the same too.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Jerichoholic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,585 ✭✭✭Jerichoholic


    Jesus man. The McMahon's even came out on Raw in January and told everyone that the product was **** and the ratings were bad. What more do you need?

    USA app, dvr streaming on USA.com, watching on Platstation vue or whatever tv app you can think of that is legal are all counted as views now.

    They won't die, nobody is saying they will. But if you can't see the decline you are fooling nobody but yourself.


  • #53
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    Jerichoholic wrote: »
    Jesus man. The McMahon's even came out on Raw in January and told everyone that the product was **** and the ratings were bad. What more do you need?

    USA app, dvr streaming on USA.com, watching on Platstation vue or whatever tv app you can think of that is legal are all counted as views now.

    They won't die, nobody is saying they will. But if you can't see the decline you are fooling nobody but yourself.

    I love when arguments backtrack to “I was just saying...” :pac:

    No, you said it because you were making a point that this was significant. You weren’t just spouting numbers randomly. These ratings falling are completely insignificant: they were flagged beforehand by Meltzer sure for going against the NBA. WWE would have prepared for that exact thing, did you notice Brock Lesnar wasn’t on the show for the first time in weeks for example, despite being involved in a major storyline and Paul Heyman being there?

    All that happened was a major sporting event killed a non-major episode of one of WWE’s weekly television shows. As it did everything else that was on in that timeslot. That’s literally it. That was my original point and, would you look at that, here we are right back at it after all that pointless debating. :pac:


  • #54
    Jerichoholic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,585 ✭✭✭Jerichoholic


    They are FACTUALLY losing viewers every week. Technology isn't moving that fast. It's very significant, it's very worrying and I'm sure they are very concerned internally which is why the booking has fallen off a cliff and they are trying everything and anything to get any kind of rating increase. Yet nothing is working anymore.


  • #55
    sky88
    Registered Users Posts: 8,689 ✭✭✭sky88


    i dont think anyone can argue at the minute that wwe financially are doing amazing tv money and stuff like saudi deal have the stock very high but creatively and rating wise its terrible.

    i dont think the ratings is all to do with the terrible product the changing landscape of tv is having a huge dent on it like i know i dont watch tv channels anymore all box sets and streaming services. The real interesting thing i think is were wwe goes when the next contract runs out and whether they put everything on the network eventually as i dont think they'll get a huge contract again


  • #56
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    Jerichoholic wrote: »
    They are FACTUALLY losing viewers every week. Technology isn't moving that fast. It's very significant, it's very worrying and I'm sure they are very concerned internally which is why the booking has fallen off a cliff and they are trying everything and anything to get any kind of rating increase. Yet nothing is working anymore.

    Why do wrestling companies get TV deals? What benefit does that bring, business-wise?


  • #57
    Jerichoholic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,585 ✭✭✭Jerichoholic


    leggo wrote: »
    Why do wrestling companies get TV deals? What benefit does that bring, business-wise?

    tenor.gif


  • #58
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    So you don’t know? Because the point you’re making suggests you don’t know. And no, saying something sarcastic like, “Go on then enlighten me genius...” doesn’t get you out of jail here. :pac:

    (Hint: it’s a one-word answer and basically the first word you’d guess...)


  • #59
    Jerichoholic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,585 ✭✭✭Jerichoholic


    Listen, having a huge insane TV deal like WWE has with Fox does not mean their ratings aren't currently dropping by the week and that their popularity is decreasing rapidly.


  • #60
    leggo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭leggo


    Jerichoholic wrote: »
    Listen, having a huge insane TV deal like WWE has with Fox does not mean their ratings aren't currently dropping by the week and that their popularity is decreasing rapidly.

    So no then.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Jerichoholic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,585 ✭✭✭Jerichoholic


    leggo wrote: »
    So no then.

    You're arrogance is hilarious when you're so undeniably wrong about this whole thing.

    WWE gets a lot money from Fox and the Saudi deals. That's all great, well done if you're a fan of corporate business.

    It doesn't remove the fact that their current product is beyond wretched and people are giving up on a weekly basis. The interest in WWE is down everywhere and you seem to think it's not even though there are stastics and facts that show that in fact it is.

    Low television ratings are due to people not watching the shows.


Advertisement