WWE Television Ratings

[Deuce]

Monday night's episode of RAW did a 3.01 (3.0) cable rating, with 4.29 million viewers. That rating was up from last week's 2.87 rating and 4.00 million viewers. The show continued the trend of losing viewers throughout the show though, with 4.32 million in the first hour and 4.28 in the second hour.

The show ranked #5 on cable TV behind History Channel programming and the Republican Party debate on Fox. The show ranked #1 among males 18-34 & males 12-17, and #2 among males 18 - 49 behind Pawn Stars.

The show was down compared to the same week last year, when it drew a 3.27 rating and pulled in 5.02 million viewers.

Both Smackdown and Raw's ratings are getting higher, I wonder why.

 

[Troy]

The ratings normally rise for WWE between Jan and April because of WrestleMania. Fans who may have given up during the year always turn back to at least check out what is going on with the Rumble and with WM.

Very good rating for Smackdown to get it back to a 2.2. RAW is okay at 3.0, at least it wasn't in the dreaded 2's.

 

[Heisenberg]

1/20 WWE SD! Rating: How Did "Sin City Smackdown" Draw?
This past Friday night's edition of WWE Smackdown drew a 2.18 cable rating with an average audience of 3.3 million viewers.

While this is down from last week's 2.21 rating, viewers for this week were actually higher as last week's show averaged about 3.1 million viewers.

Wonder who's the main reason for higher ratings than usual as of late.

 

[Dale]

No one person inparticular, probably the fact they are putting effort into the main event scene and building the storylines really well. Probably the fact it was gimmick heavy wouldn't have harmed.

 

[Chadillac]

No one person inparticular, probably the fact they are putting effort into the main event scene and building the storylines really well. Probably the fact it was gimmick heavy wouldn't have harmed.

Well, SD it's self is a better put together product than Raw, also it is more consistant, and it doesn't go through 2 months of great booking, followed by 2 months of horrible booking. So veiwers remain as steady as the product.

Also, it went through a long period of veiwership gains while Raw has been through some turbulent winds.

SD does not have the drawing power of Raw, It never has. But It's kind of like watching Raw in the fall of '97, while Raw it's self is like WCW Nitro in the fall of '97.

Everybody knew that Raw was putting on a better product durring that time, but Nitro was beating Raw B/C of pure drawing power. The Cruiser Weights and Luchadors of WCW also helped a lot.

But back to the premise; If you watch SD on a regular basis, you will become a Cody mark

 

[Heisenberg]

Final 1/23 Raw Rating: Rumble "Go-Home" Number Increases
Monday's edition of WWE Raw finished with a 3.18 cable rating, which is up from the previous week's 3.01 draw.

Monday's Raw was the "go-home" broadcast for this Sunday's Royal Rumble pay-per-view, which could explain the slight increase.

WWE drawing good ratings but it is mainly because it's what happens when you let all of your storylines mesh together and they become entertaining and great, having guys like Jericho on the show really helps too and have your WWE Champion in the main event! Punk still, always has, and always will = Ratings.

Was a great ep of RAW.

 

[The Cork]

Wonder who's the main reason for higher ratings than usual as of late.

Reading fail.

This past Friday night's edition of WWE Smackdown drew a 2.18 cable rating with an average audience of 3.3 million viewers.

While [SIZE=+2]this is down from last week's 2.21 rating[/SIZE], viewers for this week were actually higher as last week's show averaged about 3.1 million viewers.

 

[Heisenberg]

Reading fail.

I know that it was lower and I did read it correctly, I'm just saying who is the main reason for the 2.1 ratings and what not as of late. They were getting UNDER 2.0 before.

 

[The Wrestling Addict]

I think it's mainly because of the new year. People are always busy during the first month or two of the new year.

 

[Chadillac]

WWE drawing good ratings but it is mainly because it's what happens when you let all of your storylines mesh together and they become entertaining and great, having guys like Jericho on the show really helps too and have your WWE Champion in the main event! Punk still, always has, and always will = Ratings.

Was a great ep of RAW.

Not the entire truth. WWE in total has lost a half million viewers since Punk's mid summer rise. And his championship reign has resulted in week by week drops, untill 3 weeks ago. But he has draw more 2.8's and 2.9's as percentage of house holds watching, than any WWE champ since 1997. And in the second hour of every Raw, fans seem to find other programming more entertaining than the WWE. The second hour drops no longer can be scape goated on "stiff" competition. WWE execs are not sitting back happy with the fans who did stick around, they are concerned with how to keep them, and gain veiwers in the second hour. Punk has quite aways to go my dude.

 

[Heisenberg]

Blame it on WWEs writing, not CM Punk. You can't blame a certain guy for low ratings.

I'm surprised being the Cody Rhodes mark you are that you didn't suggest him being in the RAW main event scene.

 

[The Cork]

Raw gets smashed in the ratings by Pawn Stars every week, I don't see how thats successful.

 

[Kiffy Lube]

Everyday I overhear people saying their favorite show is Pawn Stars.

 

[Chadillac]

Blame it on WWEs writing, not CM Punk. You can't blame a certain guy for low ratings.

I'm surprised being the Cody Rhodes mark you are that you didn't suggest him being in the RAW main event scene.

Well you can't on one hand talk about how much more "entertaining" the WWE has been with Punk, and at the same time say the writing sucks. Either the writing sucks or the product is entertaining. Which is it? If the writing sucks, then by virtue of that alone, CM Punk can not succeed.

But I don't belive the writing completely sucks. I just belive it is inconsistant. We get 3 or 4 months of great product, then we get 8 months of bullshitt. The 8 months of bullshitt lost a half million veiwers who are not coming back.

The test for Punk, is can he bring in a half million new veiwers. And at some point, this will stop being a WWE problem, and start becoming a Punk problem if the former doesn't happen.

And no, Cody is no where near a point in his career to fix this for Raw.

 

[Chadillac]

Everyday I overhear people saying their favorite show is Pawn Stars.

And that bar show as well, forgot the name. But the good news is, the WWE can allways draw on that core of 5 million, even though 500,000 have left. My hunch is that come March, those million will be back watching in full and shows like "Pawn Star" and the other Bar show, will become stale and with in a year or two, they won't even be considered competitin.

Quick rises coincide with just as quick falls, with a half life of 3 years max. That even true with Wrestling. But WWE has shown to be able to keep a base of 4.5 to 5 million at any point in the year, so they have no where to go but up. I dont know when, but it's just a matter of time.

And I was a veiwer of the 98-01 AE, but never caught the build up that took place from '96 to the rise in late '97. So this time, I can just sit back and enjoy whatever rise may come, and appreciate it more.