Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to All Wrestling Talk. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Ratings newz; Nascar/versus might find this interestin
Topic Started: Oct 14 2007, 09:38 AM (886 Views)
Deleted User
Deleted User

Major Panic In WWE Over RAW Ratings, Future Of RAW On USA

10/12/2007 by Ryan Clark

There is panic in the WWE locker room concerning the slumping RAW ratings. As most of you know by now, Monday’s edition of RAW which featured the return of Shawn Michaels only did a 2.8 cable rating. For those that do not remember, there was a glitch in the ratings a couple of months back that caused the RAW rating to report at a low 2.5, but that doesn’t seem to be the case with this week’s low rating.

To further add to the stress of the low ratings, WWE has not been on the best of terms with the USA Network lately. Bonnie Hammer, an executive for the USA Network and the person that spearheaded the movement to bring RAW back to USA from Spike TV, has been sending the WWE RAW Creative Team 10-20 suggestions on a regular basis. From what we have heard, Vince McMahon reads these ideas, passes them along to Stephanie, who gives them to Head RAW Creative Team member Brian Gewirtz. It is said that Gewirtz basically goes over all of them and buries them in front of the entire Creative Team. One of the reasons WWE has not considered a single idea from Hammer is because they are insecure about someone else’s ideas working better than what they came up with.

Perhaps the scariest thing out of all of this is that the three year deal that WWE signed with USA/NBC/Universal on April 4, 2005 comes due shortly after next year’s WrestleMania. While RAW has done well enough to prevent the USA Network from cancelling them (WWE has allowed USA to become the number-one ranked cable network and without them they’d lose that spot), they have not delivered the numbers that the USA Network expected when the deal was signed and those were upper 4’s and 5’s. The show has been performing in the mid to low 3’s and did in the high 2’s this past week.

Furthermore this gives WWE very little leverage for negotiations and may cause them to sign a deal worth significantly less than what they signed three years ago. With the company basically giving up on pay-per-view to be their single main revenue generator in favor of television rights and fees it could affect the bottom line. While not all negative, the future outlook is not positive.



Dunno if this means much to any of you, but it seems like WWE is in a bit of trouble. If things do not improve soon, I see something drastic changing. Sure, the are still injuries to major superstars, but it hasnt been this low in a while. Im interested to see how next weeks rating fares...

Is Randy being WWE champion to blame? Is Cena gone the blame? Is the product just too stale?

Thoughts from those who care?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nathan Versus
Member Avatar
Versus > You
[ *  *  *  * ]
I have a hard time believing that a contract was signed in 2005 for “upper 4’s and 5’s” when 2002, 2003 and 2004 had drawn yearly averages of 3.7, 3.8 and 3.7...

2005 saw a minor improvement, the yearly average increased to 4.0, whilst 2006 saw an average of 3.9. Thus far, 2007 has drawn an average of 3.7.

If this article is true, I’m surprised it didn’t surface sooner. WWE clearly failed to meet the upper 4 and 5 target in 2005 and 2006. In fact, the only way this situation could’ve been resolved was if WWE drew a 2007 average that was no lower than 7.0, thus bringing the 2005, 2006 and 2007 total average in line with USA’s expectations.

It seems both WWE management and the USA Network failed to do their research, setting an unrealistic target that WWE would’ve reached in 1998, 1999, 2000 and possibly even 2001, but not at any other period.

Quote:
 
Is Randy being WWE champion to blame? Is Cena gone the blame? Is the product just too stale?


It’s the combination of many things, mainly the Benoit tragedy. The say there’s no such thing as bad publicity, but there is, and child murder is it. Following the murders, the industry was buried by the media, making a bad situation about ten times worse…

I don’t know if SmackDown’s ratings have suffered in the same way as RAW’s, but the logic is that dedicated fans - like us - watch both shows and that the main reason why RAW draws higher ratings is because of casual viewers. Casual viewers, of course, were the ones who would’ve stopped watching after the Benoit tragedy. If RAW and SmackDown lost all (or half) of their casual viewers, RAW would see a far bigger decline.

Then there’s numerous injuries and suspensions, none of which help.

And then there’s the product itself…
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JimmyJackJericho
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
This was CNP'd word for word from the latest Observer. What a fag.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lucifer
Midcarder
[ *  *  * ]
Wrestlezone is indeed faggish.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nascarsucks
Member Avatar
NOT A FAN OF NASCAR
[ *  *  *  * ]
Some legit stuff, and some bullshit.

Quote:
 
There is panic in the WWE locker room concerning the slumping RAW ratings. As most of you know by now, Monday’s edition of RAW which featured the return of Shawn Michaels only did a 2.8 cable rating. For those that do not remember, there was a glitch in the ratings a couple of months back that caused the RAW rating to report at a low 2.5, but that doesn’t seem to be the case with this week’s low rating.


Legit.

Quote:
 
To further add to the stress of the low ratings, WWE has not been on the best of terms with the USA Network lately. Bonnie Hammer, an executive for the USA Network and the person that spearheaded the movement to bring RAW back to USA from Spike TV, has been sending the WWE RAW Creative Team 10-20 suggestions on a regular basis. From what we have heard, Vince McMahon reads these ideas, passes them along to Stephanie, who gives them to Head RAW Creative Team member Brian Gewirtz. It is said that Gewirtz basically goes over all of them and buries them in front of the entire Creative Team


Probably legit.

Quote:
 
One of the reasons WWE has not considered a single idea from Hammer is because they are insecure about someone else’s ideas working better than what they came up with.


Bullshit. The audience wouldn't know either way.

Quote:
 
Perhaps the scariest thing out of all of this is that the three year deal that WWE signed with USA/NBC/Universal on April 4, 2005 comes due shortly after next year’s WrestleMania. While RAW has done well enough to prevent the USA Network from cancelling them (WWE has allowed USA to become the number-one ranked cable network and without them they’d lose that spot), they have not delivered the numbers that the USA Network expected when the deal was signed


Likely legit.

Quote:
 
those were upper 4’s and 5’s.


Bullshit. WWE hadn't pulled those numbers since 2001.

Quote:
 
Furthermore this gives WWE very little leverage for negotiations and may cause them to sign a deal worth significantly less than what they signed three years ago


Legit.

Quote:
 
With the company basically giving up on pay-per-view to be their single main revenue generator in favor of television rights and fees it could affect the bottom line.


Complete bullshit.


Reason ratings suck: There aren't any legit main eventers. WWE has done a horrific job of building people. WWE set themselves up for failure.

Really, the reason WWE should be worried is that this is the fewest percentage of households to watch Monday night wrestling on a non-holiday night since as long as ratings are archived. RAW and Nitro back in 95 scored much higher combinations than this. The previous low was 3.0 in 2004. 2007 looks to be the worst year for RAW since 97.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nascarsucks
Member Avatar
NOT A FAN OF NASCAR
[ *  *  *  * ]
By the way, Versus, I think you have your ratings all mixed up. The numbers I have show the following

2002-4.0
2003-3.8
2004-3.7
2005-3.8
2006-3.9
2007-3.7
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nathan Versus
Member Avatar
Versus > You
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dale Earnhardt III
Oct 14 2007, 05:44 PM
By the way, Versus, I think you have your ratings all mixed up. The numbers I have show the following

2002-4.0
2003-3.8
2004-3.7
2005-3.8
2006-3.9
2007-3.7

I’m going by business year.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joker
Member Avatar
Probable Date Rapist
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Just because the audience wouldn't know either way, doesn't mean that Gerwitz isn't still throwing them away. The same thing started happening when WCW was on the decline. But they wouldn't even take free publicity either.

I really think the Benoit thing hurt the biz more than anything. If this had happened during a hot period, it might not have been as bad. But it was already a cold period and then that happened and it screwed WWE over.

Also the product is the shittiest its been in a LOOONG time. Even in 1997, when the year undoubtedly belonged to WCW and the nWo, the product in the ring was still of very good quality. Now we have title matches being moved off of Pay-Per-Veiw for pizza contests, American Idol ripoffs, and a myriad of future Wrestlecrap. I've missed Raw for work a couple of weeks in a row, and I can remember a time I would've recorded every last one of them. Now I've stopped caring. A sad day, because I used to love wrestling more than anything.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
March Haire
Member Avatar
Jamie Lee Curtis
WWE Idol was brilliance, fag.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
President Skroob
Member Avatar
Messiah of Cool
Quote:
 
Now we have title matches being moved off of Pay-Per-Veiw for pizza contests,


Apparently the tag titles were never on the line in the BOD/Hardy/MVP match.

Anyway, I don't think that particular instance would negatively affect TV ratings. If anything, that should increase television ratings by giving a title match that, I assume, people wanted to see on free TV instead of PPV.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
King of Kings
Member Avatar
Politicker
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Dale Earnhardt III
Oct 14 2007, 03:37 PM
Quote:
 
There is panic in the WWE locker room concerning the slumping RAW ratings. As most of you know by now, Monday’s edition of RAW which featured the return of Shawn Michaels only did a 2.8 cable rating. For those that do not remember, there was a glitch in the ratings a couple of months back that caused the RAW rating to report at a low 2.5, but that doesn’t seem to be the case with this week’s low rating.


Legit.

Kinda. Apparently Vince was told about the rating during the Smackdown taping and he didn't give a shit.

Why should he? The company is turning a healthy profit as far as I know. Their nearest competitor can't manage more than a 1.0 average. Even if USA does drop them, which I find unlikely, they'll be picked up by someone else. They don't have a WCW breathing down their necks to worry about.

The only ones who seem to be panicing here are the dirtsheet writers.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JimmyJackJericho
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  * ]
Am I the only person that thinks about these things in any kind of meaningful way?

Bonnie Hammer (awesome name) sends in an idea. Vince uses it. It gets a 5.0. Suddenly the Hammer has twice the leverage she did. The next idea is almost certainly likely to be used as a result.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
King of Kings
Member Avatar
Politicker
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If these ideas are actually good I don't see why not because clearly WWE creative are starved of inspiration at the moment. The best they've come up with is blowing up the boss on live TV and giving him a leprechaun for a son. Then again neither of those angles had their proper pay off due to circumstances beyond their control.

It depends. Bonnie Hammer could be looking at Pacman Jones in TNA and pressure Vince into hiring Micheal Vick. You never know.

Anyway, I still don't think they're any need for concern as long as Raw can claim to be the highest rated wrestling show in North America.

Though a thought just occured. How does WWE's ratings stack up aginst those of The Ultimate Fighter and the like? I know the WWE has to compete with the NFL and MLB but what about UFC? I know they're not on the same night (I think) but it would be interesting to look at.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
March Haire
Member Avatar
Jamie Lee Curtis
She recomended moving Rey, Taker, and SCSA to Raw full time, even if they couldn't wrestle.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cowards
Member Avatar
BOW BEFORE HIM
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
FACE THE BON HAMMER!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joker
Member Avatar
Probable Date Rapist
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Fagwards, LOL
Oct 15 2007, 04:33 PM
FACE THE BON HAMMER!!

Hornswaggle vs. Bon Hammer with Val as the Special Ref, with Stevie as Special Enforcer. FTW~!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
March Haire
Member Avatar
Jamie Lee Curtis
SWOGGLE, SWOGGLE, FOR FUCK'S SAKE IT'S SWOGGLE!!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joker
Member Avatar
Probable Date Rapist
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Bob Morton
Oct 15 2007, 05:55 PM
SWOGGLE, SWOGGLE, FOR FUCK'S SAKE IT'S SWOGGLE!!!

Oh stop being such a cacksucker
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
King of Kings
Member Avatar
Politicker
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Bob Morton
Oct 15 2007, 03:46 PM
She recomended moving Rey, Taker, and SCSA to Raw full time, even if they couldn't wrestle.

Actually I thought that was Brian Gerwitz and Taker's ideas respectively. As for Austin, JR says he's offically done, aside from the odd appearance here and there.

Anyway, Smackdown could manage without Rey or Taker but not both.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joker
Member Avatar
Probable Date Rapist
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
King of Kings
Oct 15 2007, 06:51 PM
Bob Morton
Oct 15 2007, 03:46 PM
She recomended moving Rey, Taker, and SCSA to Raw full time, even if they couldn't wrestle.

Actually I thought that was Brian Gerwitz and Taker's ideas respectively. As for Austin, JR says he's offically done, aside from the odd appearance here and there.

Anyway, Smackdown could manage without Rey or Taker but not both.

I know, if they're gonna do that, why don't they just cancel Smackdown, to save CW time and money, because without Taker and Rey, it'd just be a matter of time.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · WWE · Next Topic »
Add Reply