Ratings and Buyrates aren't opinions

[Kiffy Lube]

As of late I'm getting frustrated with all types of wrestling fans. They just don't seem to meet me eye to eye. I was recently at a wrestling event where just about every in the crowd besides me and a few others were just cheering for good guys and booing the bad guys in this day and age I don't understand how they can't just put together an opinion of their own. Now, I am starting to relate these kind of fans to people that let ratings and buyrates effect their opinions. Once you bring ratings or buyrates into something that is your opinion to prove a point, you don't have an opinion anymore. You are just stating facts which is the complete opposite of making up your own mind.

I need some clarification that these people aren't completely brain dead because it's just sad. Seriously the Super Bowl gets the best ratings on TV every year now beating it's previous records but why don't people take into account how many more people are on the planet and older from the following year? That never comes into the discussion. As far as I'm concerned the greatest thing that got accurate ratings was the series finale of MASH. It actually deserved them. If you compare that to the This Is Your Life segment in 1999 that got Raw it's highest ratings you don't get the same thing. It was just a random segment that got a high rating because of how popular WWE was at the time. It's pretty pathetic.

So come on people explain why I should care about ratings again? Most of the people of that tune into Raw weekly are pretty moronic... Should I take them seriously?

 

[Dale]

So because someone boos the heels and cheers the faces that means they can't form their own opinion?

What a load of shite and just fails miserably in trying to perceive yourself as better than other fans because you like to go against the grain. Just reaffirms everything about you as a poster that I always thought.

 

[John McHenry]

People that tune in are morons? So you don't tune in? Now if you had said that the ratings don't matter because most people tune in regardless or that nothing is the same from one week to the next when they tune in or out (It tends to be random) but to say that people watching are idiots, well the means you either don't watch and very similar to voting your opinion then shouldn't count. Or you tune in and are one of the idiots.

 

[Slim]

People cheer for who they like... and boo for who they don't like.

I'm not exactly seeing the problem here.

 

[ThatGuyFromNukemHigh]

I thought this was going to be about buyrates & ratings effecting what products they watched, those are the people I cant stand.

I could care less about those perceptions, I am known to cheer both guys in the match at events. That makes the other people around me think I am fucking Blue, like I cant make up my mind or something, when infact I enjoy both guys work enough to appreciate the performance. Sometimes I convince people who have never gone to a wrestling event before to come along, those people tend to cheer with the crowds, othertimes people just get caught up in the emotion of the crowd and want to be a part of it.

As for the people talking about ratings, when ratings are low, there is typically a stong opposing show airing. I remember a few years ago when House was on that Raw's ratings would get higher in the 10:00 hour after House. When ratings are high it is typically because of weak opposing shows. The same can be said for buyrates, but something needs to be added on this one. Buyrates are slightly more telling than ratings due to the fact that the PPV's are hyped to no end, so people who are buying the PPV and not streaming it are willing to dish out that money for atleast one match on the card, but that also means that the card has to rely on atleast 1 good match-up, and buyrates cant be blamed on a single person.

 

[Chris]

I came in here ready to agree with you, but you lost me after the title. I think it's incredibly stupid to let ratings and buyrates influence who you cheer for, yes, but I really don't see what's wrong with fans at live events cheering for faces & booing heels, that's how it should be. More heels get cheered now than we've had get cheered in awhile anyway.

 

[The Cork]

Cheering faces and booing heels makes for better TV anyway.

It looks a mess when your top babyface cuts anti-cancer promos and still gets jeered, while a snarky prick who insults everyone and claims to be better than you gets a positive reaction.

I have no idea what the jist of the OP was, or what point was trying to be made, seemed totally unrelated to the thread title. God forbid people watch wrestling, right?

 

[Keith]

While I agree broadly with the main point of the thread starter I do think there are many contredictions.

Like Cork hinted at cheering faces and booing heels is surely a sign that the promotion is doing something right, not saying there isn't room for a inbetween Punk is proof of that. But fans being compelled to support the faces and dislike the heels is one of the corner stones of the business. Also couldn't it just be that the fans you speak off were just there to enjoy their evening, not the same as being mindless sheep.

 

[Deezy]

mark crowds are more enjoyable crowds than smark crowds imo.

marks seem to actually care about what they are watching instead of the smarks who are tyrig to get noticed.

 

[Defiant]

There's nothing wrong with using buyrates and ratings to support an opinion, but sometimes I feel wrestling fans in particular forget the difference between presenting data and interpreting it.

For example, lets say the numbers start to drop a bit during some match or segment on Raw and doesn't really pick up again for the night, and we are discussing what we thought of the show afterwards. Someone presents the show's ratings that week and how they started to get weaker into the program, then concludes: "Look how much this week's show sucked compared to last week" or whatever, and their 'argument' doesn't go much beyond that.

The fallacy there is that numbers just don't tell you the whole story and don't account for a lot of factors. Were people tuning out because they disliked the guy in the ring? Or because the person they wanted to watch had already performed? Or maybe some other program on TV entirely just began and people switched to that? The numbah's don't lie, sure, but they don't reflect much on their own, either.

Numbers and money are quantifiable, opinions are not. That's what I was taught in marketing, anyway. Many companies do focus group testings or "Qualitative Research" specifically to gauge the opinions of their consumers and pin down what exactly the appeal of their brand is, and more importantly, what keeps them from buying the product emotionally. When a compamny only looks at what the consumers are/aren't buying without also listening to consumer feedback, it lives in its own world.

My point is that numbers and personal opinions should be complimentary, used to support one another. Fighting an opinion with numbers, and vice versa, will accomplish nothing.

 

[Keith]

There's nothing wrong with using buyrates and ratings to support an opinion, but sometimes I feel wrestling fans in particular forget the difference between presenting data and interpreting it.

For example, lets say the numbers start to drop a bit during some match or segment on Raw and doesn't really pick up again for the night, and we are discussing what we thought of the show afterwards. Someone presents the show's ratings that week and how they started to get weaker into the program, then concludes: "Look how much this week's show sucked compared to last week" or whatever, and their 'argument' doesn't go much beyond that.

The fallacy there is that numbers just don't tell you the whole story and don't account for a lot of factors. Were people tuning out because they disliked the guy in the ring? Or because the person they wanted to watch had already performed? Or maybe some other program on TV entirely just began and people switched to that? The numbah's don't lie, sure, but they don't reflect much on their own, either.

Numbers and money are quantifiable, opinions are not. That's what I was taught in marketing, anyway. Many companies do focus group testings or "Qualitative Research" specifically to gauge the opinions of their consumers and pin down what exactly the appeal of their brand is, and more importantly, what keeps them from buying the product emotionally. When a compamny only looks at what the consumers are/aren't buying without also listening to consumer feedback, it lives in its own world.

My point is that numbers and personal opinions should be complimentary, used to support one another. Fighting an opinion with numbers, and vice versa, will accomplish nothing.

Ok you seem to know far more about this than me, but is there any proof that fans choose who to cheer or boo based on ratings? I think there is a certain treid mostly with teengers and people in their early 20s to like something just because it is seen as the cool thing to do, but I am not convinced that applies here, often a wrestling fans reponse at a event is instinctive, they just naturally feel one way or the other about a wrestler.

 

[Defiant]

Ok you seem to know far more about this than me, but is there any proof that fans choose who to cheer or boo based on ratings? I think there is a certain treid mostly with teengers and people in their early 20s to like something just because it is seen as the cool thing to do, but I am not convinced that applies here, often a wrestling fans reponse at a event is instinctive, they just naturally feel one way or the other about a wrestler.

Actually, I wasn't talking about the OP's audience cheer/boo theory thing because I thought it was kinda silly like everyone else. My post was just in regards to the way people use ratings and viewership data the wrong way in discussions, or at least why I think so.

 

[Kiffy Lube]

I think a few missed by point because like Dale said I do come off as an elitist with certain thoughts. I won't deny that.

I'll try another route here since people completely disregarded by M.A.S.H. point and Super Bowl argument and more got on me about other things. I think a lot of internet fans can't back up their own opinions so they rely on numbers(case in point PYSCH but he's got pretty awesome at using them in his favor). Let's take the Attitude Era it's the holy grail of wrestling well '98 and '99 are portrayed that way but the overall wrestling was awful. It rose in '00 and '01 but the ratings didn't follow they started to decline. It's like that everything that happened after '99 shouldn't be considered as great just because less people are watching. If I compare pretty much every single wrestling match from '98 and '99 to something like Bryan/Punk today it's still a downgrade. People say they want a racier product, I just want a BETTER wrestling product or at least good matches to be highlighted more than entire eras.

And whoever jumped on me about calling all Raw fans morons, I don't know why you think I said they were all morons. If you really think everybody that tunes into wrestling is one our wavelength you have another thing coming. Wrestling relates really well to handicap people. I could back this up by numbers but that wouldn't be opinionated and I'm getting off track.

 

[CaptainxBumout]

As far as ratings are concerned, nobody really has a Nielsen box anymore. Many of people in the TV industry are well aware of this and take that into account. Nielsen doesn't account for DVR or on demand or website activity and views. Not to mention, there is a golden age of television going on right now with all the great shows. There are way more channels as well as tv shows so nothing really gets as high ratings anymore. There are certain exceptions but they mainly exist on the big three channels. The market is huge now and you don't need as high ratings anymore to be considered popular.

As far as people booing heels and cheering faces, I don't mind it. If you really think about it, they're helping them get over. Imagine if everyone including his fans boo'd CM Punk. He'd be getting amazing heat instead of mixed reactions. Those mixed reactions almost make it seem like he's failing to get the crowd to respond to him because he's supposed to make us hate him. But that's really just a problem due to this new age of smarks. I do however agree with your thoughts about people liking people because of ratings but honestly I've never seen anyone do that.

 

[Keith]

I think a few missed by point because like Dale said I do come off as an elitist with certain thoughts. I won't deny that.

I'll try another route here since people completely disregarded by M.A.S.H. point and Super Bowl argument and more got on me about other things. I think a lot of internet fans can't back up their own opinions so they rely on numbers(case in point PYSCH but he's got pretty awesome at using them in his favor). Let's take the Attitude Era it's the holy grail of wrestling well '98 and '99 are portrayed that way but the overall wrestling was awful. It rose in '00 and '01 but the ratings didn't follow they started to decline. It's like that everything that happened after '99 shouldn't be considered as great just because less people are watching. If I compare pretty much every single wrestling match from '98 and '99 to something like Bryan/Punk today it's still a downgrade. People say they want a racier product, I just want a BETTER wrestling product or at least good matches to be highlighted more than entire eras.

And whoever jumped on me about calling all Raw fans morons, I don't know why you think I said they were all morons. If you really think everybody that tunes into wrestling is one our wavelength you have another thing coming. Wrestling relates really well to handicap people. I could back this up by numbers but that wouldn't be opinionated and I'm getting off track.

Fair enough and to be honest I have no idea if your view on internet fans is right or not. I can only speak for myself and say that when I judge someone I do it based on what i have seen of them and whether I believe they have something to offer, but naturally I might think that if given a chance a person with talent should lead to good ratings, but of course it doesn't always work that way.