The W
Views: 97590871
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
23.7.14 0055
The W - Pro Wrestling - RAW rating!!
This thread has 4 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.80
Pages: 1 2 Next
(6471 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (25 total)
knightvibe
Salami








Since: 12.7.03
From: st louis, missouri

Since last post: 3480 days
Last activity: 3479 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.91
from www.pwinsider.com



FULL WWE RATINGS REPORT
by Dave Scherer @ 6:03:00 PM on 4/27/2004

This week's edition of Raw did a 4.0 cable rating, with a six share, according to Nielsen Media Research. That is up from last week's 3.8. The highest rated segment on the show was the overrun, which did a 4.6. The show did hours of 4.0 and 4.1.
In other ratings news, Velocity did a 0.7 cable rating, with a one share.

The last edition of Confidential did a 0.6 cable rating, with a 1 share.

Heat did a 0.9 cable rating, with a two share.



---------------

pretty cool that they hit 4.0 on a week with no pre set main event. Benoit is really paying off and RAW is hot right now. The Lottery hit 4.5 and the next week 4.3 and many on this board and else where hope it would stay above 4.0 but it went down to 3.8 for a couple weeks. Good to see them hit a 4.0 leading up to Michaels vs. benoit next week. WWE is on the rise. I think Smackdwon should be headed up as well with the return of the Undertaker this week and Heyman being back. Last weeks Smackdown was a slight improvement but right now RAW is on the way up fast.



and thats all i have to say about that!
Promote this thread!
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 387 days
Last activity: 387 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.58
4.0 is in the same range as 3.8, so its nice that its a bump, but its not substantial. The significant thing that can be taken out of it is that there was no post-Austin'ian decline in the ratings. They've remained in the upper region of the range for the past 6 months, so the disappearance of Austin has not caused a ratings drag.



WooHoo, the wrestling dead pool is back in business.
bigtotoro
Linguica








Since: 16.2.04
From: houston

Since last post: 3626 days
Last activity: 2577 days
AIM:  
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.97
Does this put an end to the theory that Benoit is not a draw? Or can you attribute every success he's been involved him to HHH/HBK? Rumble did a decent number, Mania did a good number, Backlash numbers are not available yet but I can assume they would be pretty fair.
BigVitoMark
Lap cheong








Since: 10.8.02
From: Queen's University, Canada

Since last post: 3285 days
Last activity: 3195 days
ICQ:  
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.10
Raw's been popping the occasional 4 for a while now, so I wouldn't assume anything from it. If the number gets up around 4.2 or 4.3, that might be noteworthy especially, as redsoxnation alluded to, since Austin is no longer on the show.

I think that re-affirms the notion that 3.8 is what the show is gonna get regardless - it'll take something especially good to get over that regularly but they'd really have to screw up to fall below it. 3.8 is more or less the devoted fan base. But hey, this is the first time since the split that Raw has been consistently good for more than a week or two at a time (knock on wood), so to see a sustained boost over the summer at this point wouldn't surprise me.



Don't you hate pants?
Net Hack Slasher
Banger








Since: 6.1.02
From: Outer reaches of your mind

Since last post: 3497 days
Last activity: 1917 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.40
That's a very good rating, 4.0 for the first hour is a very positive number... Ignoring the angle that never ends. The show as a whole was very entertaining and alot of positive steps on different things.

It also shows that Chris Benoit is a legit player. NO HHH or HBK in the actual main event(sure they did run ins but still), you had Benoit (along with Flair I guess) as your major stars in the main event wrestling a 20-minute match which did a great over-run... Only 0.1 2nd hour spike, is a little unusual considering the overrun did well enough. The 2nd hour number certainly wasn't consistent with how well the first hour went and the overrun. But eh overall very good show which responded with a nice number.




12 ! Leaf Wins to add another banner behind Trish
Simba
Frankfurter








Since: 7.8.02
From: Boston, MA

Since last post: 2412 days
Last activity: 2020 days
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.16
Why doesn't everyone just type:

"It's obvious that the higher ratings are attributed to the wrestlers I like and the lower ratings are attributed to the wrestlers I don't like."

Finding a theory for every minor spike/dip in the ratings usually gets debunked within a few weeks. And we've been coming up with theories for YEARS trying to figure it out. With no "Monday Night War" going on, WWE TV ratings are even more useless than they were before.



Reserved for future use.
Dave Gagnon
Mettwurst








Since: 25.7.03
From: Rimouski

Since last post: 3611 days
Last activity: 3608 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.88
    Originally posted by Simba
    Why doesn't everyone just type:

    "It's obvious that the higher ratings are attributed to the wrestlers I like and the lower ratings are attributed to the wrestlers I don't like."


Exactly. You're absolutely right.

So if a HHH/Benoit match earns a 4.5 rating, it's because Benoit draws ratings. But if a HHH/Benoit match earns a 3.2, it's because people are obviously sick of HHH. That's what you'll read on the net.

If the rating is consistent is because RAW has been a solid product in the last few months. SmackDown has been terrible as of late and they have declining ratings. Simple as that.






Columnist and NWA TNA recapper at www.411mania.com . Check out the good stuff NOW!

Everything I say is a lie. Except that. And that. And that. And that. And that....And that.
samoflange
Lap cheong








Since: 22.2.04
From: Cambridge, MA

Since last post: 279 days
Last activity: 271 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.41
A fairly unimportant question:

Why do you think the overrun always gets the bigger ratings? Are people really flipping to RAW just to catch the last 15 minutes or so? I wonder who these people are, and why they even bother to watch only the very last moments of a 2 hour show at all? Just seems crazy to me..



Marco: But we can chew nails and shoot 'em out as bullets, right?
Sparks: Nails, chains -- you won't have titanium teeth for nothing.
Murphy: Nails are like candy to robots! And we'll eat tires instead of licorice.
Debbie: GAH! No we won't!!
Murphy: Maybe YOU won't.
The Amazing Salami
Sujuk








Since: 23.5.02
From: Oklahoma

Since last post: 3695 days
Last activity: 3694 days
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.50
    Originally posted by samoflange
    A fairly unimportant question:

    Why do you think the overrun always gets the bigger ratings? Are people really flipping to RAW just to catch the last 15 minutes or so? I wonder who these people are, and why they even bother to watch only the very last moments of a 2 hour show at all? Just seems crazy to me..


Some people mostly care about the main eventers. They feel like the first two hours is basically a build to the final match. And the first 5-10 minutes of the final match is all "feeling out" anyway....so you catch the final 10 minutes and you get the "important stuff" without wasting two hours.

Either that or they want to watch whatever comes on at 10 (central) and accidentally watch the end of RAW waiting for their show :)



The Amazing Salami's Not-So-Random
W of the Arbitrary Segment of Time


TARNISH
Tarnish says:It was one of the best beers I've had in yonks.
Tribal Prophet
Andouille








Since: 9.1.02
From: Winnipeg, MB, Canada

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 6 hours
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.22
    Originally posted by The Amazing Salami
    Either that or they want to watch whatever comes on at 10 (central) and accidentally watch the end of RAW waiting for their show :)

Bingo!


Tribal Prophet

(edited by thecubsfan on 28.4.04 1353)


geemoney
Scrapple








Since: 26.1.03
From: Naples, FL

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 13 min.
AIM:  
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.72
    Originally posted by The Amazing Salami


    Either that or they want to watch whatever comes on at 10 (central) and accidentally watch the end of RAW waiting for their show :)

Are there THAT many people interested in watching "This Just In"? (On SpikeTV, anyway).



Draft Thoughts, my new car, and more!: Experience It
MonteCarl
Potato korv








Since: 21.1.02
From: Saginaw, MI

Since last post: 145 days
Last activity: 21 days
AIM:  
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.75
    Originally posted by Tribal Prophet
      Originally posted by The Amazing Salami
      Either that or they want to watch whatever comes on at 10 (central) and accidentally watch the end of RAW waiting for their show :)

    Bingo!


Are there really that many people out there tuning in to see "This Just In" to bump up the RAW rating by .5 for just the over run?

EDIT: geemoney beat me to it by 45 seconds!

(edited by MonteCarl on 28.4.04 1127)

(edited by thecubsfan on 28.4.04 1353)
thecubsfan
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 10.12.01
From: Aurora, IL

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 10.00
I believe, when TNT would air a rerun of Nitro right after a live episode, they'd get the same ratings spike, with no new different audience tuning in.

People who watch these shows casually have been trained that the big stuff happens near the hours, and when what they're watching ends at 11/10c, they can flip to RAW to find out what happened there. You can check out the last three minutes and figure out if you missed anything.

Another way to look at is to consider is it's not just one stable group of 3.4ratings (+/- .2) worth of people who watch all 123+ minutes. There's a group who's going to watch all of it, and there's another group that's gonna come and go during the length of the program depending on who's on there and who's on elsewhere.

Just to make up some example numbers (have no truth to them)
- say RAW's getting 3 million people watching, according to the ratings
- and maybe 1.5mil watch from start to finish
- so that leaves another 1.5mil worth of people
- but it's really another 3 million of people, those who flip out being replaced by those who flip in
- At the end of the night, the 1.5 die hards and the 3.0 casuals all turn in to watch the end of the main event, so the final quarter rating surges 4.5 million.



thecubsfan.com - CMLLBlog
samoflange
Lap cheong








Since: 22.2.04
From: Cambridge, MA

Since last post: 279 days
Last activity: 271 days
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.41
Very nice explanations, Salami and cubsfan. Makes sense to me now. Thanks



Lloyd: When I met Mary, I got that old fashioned romantic feeling, where I'd do anything to bone her.
Harry: That's a special feeling.
Hoodle
Bauerwurst








Since: 19.12.03

Since last post: 3272 days
Last activity: 3267 days
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.53
    Originally posted by thecubsfan
    At the end of the night, the 1.5 die hards and the 3.0 casuals all turn in to watch the end of the main event, so the final quarter rating surges 4.5 million.


VERY interesting. I never thought of it that way.
Torchslasher
Knackwurst








Since: 17.1.02
From: New F'n Jersey

Since last post: 287 days
Last activity: 254 days
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.75
    Originally posted by Dave Gagnon
      Originally posted by Simba
      Why doesn't everyone just type:

      "It's obvious that the higher ratings are attributed to the wrestlers I like and the lower ratings are attributed to the wrestlers I don't like."


    Exactly. You're absolutely right.

    So if a HHH/Benoit match earns a 4.5 rating, it's because Benoit draws ratings. But if a HHH/Benoit match earns a 3.2, it's because people are obviously sick of HHH. That's what you'll read on the net.

    If the rating is consistent is because RAW has been a solid product in the last few months. SmackDown has been terrible as of late and they have declining ratings. Simple as that.





Wait a minute. One moment you are saying that individuals are wrong to attribute ratings to certain wrestlers or storylines. In the next moment you yourself are opining that because Raw is "solid" TO YOU, that is why the rating is good? What if you thought that Raw was "not solid" during the past month and that Smackdown was "not terrible?"

The point is, you are guilty of the same type of thinking that you are ripping others for: I.E. ascribing your own view to a critical analysis of the ratings.

Besides, PPV buyrates are where the real analysis begins and ends.



"Did Webb see it?"- Cal Meechum
"Unless he's blind"- Joe Wilson
"Check him. Oh, and Joe, until we find out what happened all three of us are blind"- Cal
"I'll go poke Webb's eyes out"- Crow T. Robot

MST3K- The Movie
Dave Gagnon
Mettwurst








Since: 25.7.03
From: Rimouski

Since last post: 3611 days
Last activity: 3608 days
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.88
    Originally posted by Torchslasher
    Wait a minute. One moment you are saying that individuals are wrong to attribute ratings to certain wrestlers or storylines. In the next moment you yourself are opining that because Raw is "solid" TO YOU, that is why the rating is good? What if you thought that Raw was "not solid" during the past month and that Smackdown was "not terrible?"

    The point is, you are guilty of the same type of thinking that you are ripping others for: I.E. ascribing your own view to a critical analysis of the ratings.

    Besides, PPV buyrates are where the real analysis begins and ends.


I didn't say that that the RAW rating was good. I said that it was consistent. I said that the ratings for SmackDown were declining and you can't argue that. If a number goes from a 3.5 to 3.0, that's declining. I never said that the rating was bad. For a guy who quoted the entire post, it seems like you didn't read it.

(edited by Dave Gagnon on 29.4.04 0633)


Columnist and NWA TNA recapper at www.411mania.com . Check out the good stuff NOW!

Everything I say is a lie. Except that. And that. And that. And that. And that....And that.
Sec19Row53
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Oconomowoc, WI

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 2 hours
Y!:
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.41
    Originally posted by samoflange
    A fairly unimportant question:

    Why do you think the overrun always gets the bigger ratings? Are people really flipping to RAW just to catch the last 15 minutes or so? I wonder who these people are, and why they even bother to watch only the very last moments of a 2 hour show at all? Just seems crazy to me..


It's what I do. I have better things to do with my time during those two hours, including making sure the kids do their homework, get to bed, and NOT watch wrestling. They're too young, and I don't think it's OK for them to watch. They have been told this.

I'm not bashing wrestling by this post, I'm just offering an explanation from someone who, if a Nielsen household, would be a part of this spike.

So why am I here if I don't watch the whole show? I follow WWE through this board (and previously through CRZ's recaps). I'm still here because it offers me MORE than wrestling.



[It's where I sit]
Net Hack Slasher
Banger








Since: 6.1.02
From: Outer reaches of your mind

Since last post: 3497 days
Last activity: 1917 days
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.40
    Originally posted by Dave Gagnon
      Originally posted by Simba
      Why doesn't everyone just type:

      "It's obvious that the higher ratings are attributed to the wrestlers I like and the lower ratings are attributed to the wrestlers I don't like."


    Exactly. You're absolutely right.

    So if a HHH/Benoit match earns a 4.5 rating, it's because Benoit draws ratings. But if a HHH/Benoit match earns a 3.2, it's because people are obviously sick of HHH. That's what you'll read on the net.

    If the rating is consistent is because RAW has been a solid product in the last few months. SmackDown has been terrible as of late and they have declining ratings. Simple as that.

I'm not saying the a good rating is because there's no HHH or HBK in the main event. I'm just saying it's a positive sign for Benoit's legitimacy of a main eventer that he can do a 20-minute match without involving main event mainstays (like HBK or HHH) and people accept it and tune in... If the rating did well with a main event with Benoit with guys like Edge, Batista and Flair. Maybe just maybe Benoit will have the ability to draw interest in a main event feud without the WWE Raw security blanket that is HHH (and lesser extent HBK). The ability to have diversity on top is a good thing, right?

(edited by Net Hack Slasher on 29.4.04 1539)



11 Leaf Wins to add another banner behind Trish
Torchslasher
Knackwurst








Since: 17.1.02
From: New F'n Jersey

Since last post: 287 days
Last activity: 254 days
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.75
    Originally posted by Dave Gagnon
      Originally posted by Torchslasher
      Wait a minute. One moment you are saying that individuals are wrong to attribute ratings to certain wrestlers or storylines. In the next moment you yourself are opining that because Raw is "solid" TO YOU, that is why the rating is good? What if you thought that Raw was "not solid" during the past month and that Smackdown was "not terrible?"

      The point is, you are guilty of the same type of thinking that you are ripping others for: I.E. ascribing your own view to a critical analysis of the ratings.

      Besides, PPV buyrates are where the real analysis begins and ends.


    I didn't say that that the RAW rating was good. I said that it was consistent. I said that the ratings for SmackDown were declining and you can't argue that. If a number goes from a 3.5 to 3.0, that's declining. I never said that the rating was bad. For a guy who quoted the entire post, it seems like you didn't read it.

    (edited by Dave Gagnon on 29.4.04 0633)


Again, you attributed the bad rating on Smackdown to it being "terrible." You also attributed Raw's "consistent" ratings to the show being "solid." I was talking about your reasoning as to why the ratings are how they are. Therefore, I feel you are showing the same fallacy as someone who would say that Benoit's draw as champion is the biggest indicator as to why Raw has drawn consistent ratings. It's the subjective reasoning that is in question.

I feel the truth on this issue is much more difficult to judge than that. Theories like those postulated by Cubsfan and Mr. Salami are more akin to the actual reasons for the ratings being what they are (casual fans who might only be interested in the ME of the show; fans might switch over to Raw and decide to stay if they like what is on at that moment).



"Did Webb see it?"- Cal Meechum
"Unless he's blind"- Joe Wilson
"Check him. Oh, and Joe, until we find out what happened all three of us are blind"- Cal
"I'll go poke Webb's eyes out"- Crow T. Robot

MST3K- The Movie
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread rated: 4.80
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread ahead: Velocity Thought and more...
Next thread: the mighty mighty WWE SMACKDOWN WORKRATE REPORT- 4/29/2004!
Previous thread: It's gonna happen TONIGHT... oh, wait, no it's not...
(6471 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Part time wrestling has had advantages. At least in the past when softball season was approaching, we knew Sid would be disappearing.
- redsoxnation, Part time wrestling (2002)
The W - Pro Wrestling - RAW rating!!Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.406 seconds.