I Told You Guys Bryan and Ryder needed to be De-Pushed

[ryan86]

ALL OF YOU CAN EAT YOUR WORDS NOW!

The WWE has demoted Ryder due to his horrible preformance in the top business indicator: Ratings.

His match with Punk and Bryan in that 6 man main-event on Dec 19th, brew a horrible 2.5 for the first half of match, then a 2.6 for the second half. It was the worst ratings preformance since 1997 and LIKE I TOLD EVERY ONE OF YOU, BRYAN AND RYDER WERE NEVER REAL AND NEEDED TO BE DE-PUSHED. And ryder is set to become an after-thought JUST LIKE I SAID.

Punk, Ryder, and Bryan are drawing the worst ratings for the WWE and ultimantly that desides a wrestler's staying power. And now we are about to see a 10th consecutive ratings drop, JUST LIKE I SAID.

I started this argument 6 weeks ago and I HAVE BEEN PROVEN RIGHT.

So SlyFox: how are my post now? I have been proven right with 20/20 foresight. And I think you should re-instate my posting privaliges for being the only one who could tell the truth.

EAT YOUR WORDS PEOPLE

 

[Max Headroom]

Go on witcha.

 

[justinsayne]

Do you even know how ratings work? seriously...

 

[ryan86]

You dont have to take my word for it, just check out every credible wrestling news reporting site. And it doesnt take a genious to figure out that a 2.6 for a main-event and over-run, compared to the entire average for the show was a 2.92, with Cena segments gaining over 400,000 viewers , to show you people are tuning out from Bryan and Ryder and not coming in strong for punk. Why do you think this week's raw closed with Cena-Kane? B/C Punk, Bryan, And Ryder under preformed the average. And the WWE has de-moted Ryder due to this, JUST LIKE I SAID HE NEEDED TO BE. next will be Bryan. And Punk has completly flopped as a ratings draw. That is WWE's biggest concern right now. 10 straight weekly drops, with Punk being the champ in half of those.

My understanding of the business side of the WWE, allowed me to predict every last bit of this.

Dont take my word, B/C you people are too immature to admit i was right all along. Just look at the evidence and what the WWE is doing it's self.

 

[Барбоса]

 

[justinsayne]

Changing systems of viewing have impacted Nielsen's methods of market research. In 2005, Nielsen began measuring the usage of digital video recordings such as TiVo. Initial results indicate that time-shifted viewing will have a significant impact on television ratings. The networks are not yet figuring these new results into their ad rates due to the resistance of advertisers.

The ratings system is flawed, & has been for years, the number are not accurate as to what people are watching at all as large number of people DVR shit & those number have yet to be figured into the ratings.

 

[The Man They Call WMD]

The ratings system is flawed, & has been for years, the number are not accurate as to what people are watching at all as large number of people DVR shit & those number have yet to be figured into the ratings.

I agree the system is flawed and so is your point. Every week the rating system is flawed. Are you implying it is just a coincidence that this week had the worse ratings? I’m not naive enough to think that. I disagree with the WWE on blaming Ryder. He is just a mid carder, and shouldn’t be expected or blamed for low rating in a main event that he is the 6th biggest star in.

 

[ryan86]

let me explain something to you. That system has not just been put in place 10 weeks ago. the ratings are tanking. PERIOD!

AND GO BACK AND LOOK ATTHE RATINGS IN '05-'09.

They stayed in the 3.8-4.0 range with alot of 4.3's and 4.5's durring WM season, especialy in 05, 06, and 07.

And the resistance to the new system by advertisers, is B/C they can't include those numbers B/C is gives no legit figure on how many people watched their advetisments. How many tivo and DVR recordings are actually watching the advertizing products? NONE!

So advertisers will pay based on the percentage of house-holds watching who they think will see their commercials. And that percentage dictates the ammount of money advertisers will pay.

When the percentage of house-holds watching goes down, or does not keep up with the new percentage of house-holds added to the system due to a growing population, that the WWE loses that same percentage of leveraging power when negotiating advertising revenue.
Your point is laughable.

 

[justinsayne]

1- Apparently you've never heard of product placement...

2- The sample size for the Neilson box's is about 5,000 U.S. households, which is a considerably small sample size.

3- Ratings take a dip every year around this time.

4- "WM season" doesn't really get started until the RR which is a month away.

5- All these ME and shit that you keep blaming the low ratings on also feature Alberto, so perhaps you can explain to me why you don't seem to think he's the problem. Also this ME you're talking about feature Dolph too, so perhaps he should be taking some of the blame too, why aren't you shitting on him. After all he's getting the ME push right now not Ryder.

 

[ryan86]

That rating system is in place for every cable channel to abide by. It is what dictates how much adverisers will pay. And it is not a set precident for raw ratings to decline 10 consecutive weeks. And the past 17 weeks for the trend of losing viewers in the second hour. That is not a ratings system problem, that is a WWE product problem.

You are so ignorant and indenial to what is going on. How much money is the WWE going to get out of advertisers with those excuses you laid out? They would be laughed out of the room.

The way the ratings system is set up, is a scientific reading of how many people are watching a product's advertisments. Scientific polling is done in the same way.

No matter how many excuses you come up with, dont hold any water with advertisers (if that was the case the WWE was presenting, which they never would).

What are you trying to say? Advertisers should disregard the ratings system and pay based on unscientific excuses?

The neilson ratings system is scientific unlike excuses

 

[justinsayne]

1-It's still a flawed system, & has been for years. Which is why you see more and more product placement in tv shows now then you did say 5 yrs. ago.

2-You didn't answer my question about ADR or Dolph, why are not to to blame for low ratings yet you're so quick to throw the blame on guys like D-Bry, Punk, & Ryder, who btw are out selling ADR, & Dolph in merch, and routinely get bigger reactions every week?

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

I bet he thinks Cody Rhodes would improve ratings.

 

[GI Cake]

You won't get of out of the Prison at this rate. Kinda sucks that I tried to help and throw you a bone. Can we also forget about the fact the NFL and NHL are having perhaps the most exciting seasons of the decade? Ratings are going to jump back up soon. But the WWE needs to offer more if they want to compete with the NFL and the NHL.

 

[ryan86]

1-It's still a flawed system, & has been for years. Which is why you see more and more product placement in tv shows now then you did say 5 yrs. ago.

2-You didn't answer my question about ADR or Dolph, why are not to to blame for low ratings yet you're so quick to throw the blame on guys like D-Bry, Punk, & Ryder, who btw are out selling ADR, & Dolph in merch, and routinely get bigger reactions every week?

#1 Punk and Bryan are the current champs. They will only remain champs so ong as the ratings dictate, which is the WWE's main source of revenue. Without it, the WWE cant pomote it's events or PPV's. And Ratings hold a much larger precident over merchandise sells. And again, for the 10th time, it is what drives the advertising revenue which is what makes the WWE able to profit. So if the ratings dive to a 1.5, but Punk and Bryan are still selling merchandise, that wont mean a lick to the WWE B/C the outcome would mean WWE's networth cut in half.

Why are you indenial?

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

He still can't answer the question. Quit pussyfootin'.

 

[Remix]

#1 Punk and Bryan are the current champs. They will only remain champs so ong as the ratings dictate, which is the WWE's main source of revenue.

No, it isn't. WWE's income from their TV shows are independent of their ratings. Especially the completely and utterly overanalysed, meaningless quarter hour ratings which are more effected by Ad breaks than they are by who's in the segment.

Without it, the WWE cant pomote it's events or PPV's.

Yes they can. By regular advertising methods.

And Ratings hold a much larger precident over merchandise sells.

Yes, the thing that doesn't make WWE any money is obviously more important than something that does.

And again, for the 10th time, it is what drives the advertising revenue which is what makes the WWE able to profit.

No it doesn't. WWE get paid by the USA network and SyFy per show, who take 100% of the advertising revenue in exchange.

So if the ratings dive to a 1.5, but Punk and Bryan are still selling merchandise, that wont mean a lick to the WWE B/C the outcome would mean WWE's networth cut in half.

Still no.

Why are you in denial?

He's not, you're just an idiot.

 

[ryan86]

He still can't answer the question. Quit pussyfootin'.

I have answerd the question. So has the viewers. So has the WWE.

I said the whole ryder thing was fake and needed to be de-pushed. You guys called me "stupid". I also stated he was a short-term mrchandise fad and would hortly become an afterthought. The WWE demoted Ryder. I dont have to answer the question, the WWE just did.

Punk and Bryan were suposed to be rising phenominons and the viewers have spoken. ADR and the rest were never claiming to bring about "change". Punk and bryan are advertising themselves at that threashold. They are failing those own set expections. Who has the belts around their waste? You hold that belt if your bringing in sucess. Punk and Bryan are falling short in the main-event in ratings, going from the show average of 2.92, to a 2.6. The viewers have spoken.

Finaly, ADR and the rest are just as responsible, but if all of them are losing viewers, Punk and Bryan are no better.

 

[Remix]

Yeah, if you buy the whole "Ryder's being depushed" thing, you're a bigger idiot than I thought. Which is an impressive feat. Ryder was and is a midcarder, the thing with Eve isn't a recent ocurrance he's just going back where he was for all but one week which was in the smarkiest city on earth after the biggest win of his career. That news is just dirtsheets making guesses and stirring shit to get us in a frenzy.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

The troll will not die if it keeps getting fed.

 

[ryan86]

Kotre IbushImix:

You are such an idiot it's unreal:

The WWE's ability to remain a global powerhouse is based purley on their ability to draw in viewers. USA pays the WWE based on what advertisers are willing to pay, based on how many viewers are watching and what demographics are being reached. The WWE can negotiate for a larger share of the advertising revenue if it's ratings go up. If the WWE were to start pulling in 4.0's again, They could demand a larger share of the revenue B/C advertisers would be paying more to advertise in that time slot. Like-wise, If the raings go down, the advertisers pay less B/C their products are reaching less people. In the long run, this effects the WWE greatly. Especially in negotiating future deals.

Ratings are the #1 important thing to the WWE and Ryder is proof. They demoted him purley based on that.

And if the WWE loses viewers, it means less potential PPV buys and weaker ticket sells.

Ratings = exposure. Clothing merchandise sells = less than 5% of total revenue.

 

[Ubiquitous]

How you don't realize the flaw in your logic here is uncanny. So, by your standard, if this weeks main event slot/overrun brings the same ratings, Kane and John Cena should be demoted? Or is it possible there's just a larger amount of people recording it last week due to outside interferences like other shows and whatnot? The fact that this time of year is usually the lowest rated of the year has nothing to do with it either, right? Or is it possible WWE knew going into last weeks episode that their ratings would be poor, and booked the main event accordingly for the sole purpose of blaming the "Internet darling", giving them a "justified" reason to de-push them. Because one weeks worth of ratings is enough for you to go on some sort of ego-driven i-told-you-so rant, right? I swear, some of the people on this forum....

 

[ryan86]

The WWE has declined for 10 consecutive weeks and has been losing viewers in the second hour for the past 17 weeks. This has NEVER HAPPENED DURRING TIMES OF RISING PHENOMINONS; IE: PUNK.

Punk gets the same blame as everybody else. And the reason that Raw closed with Cena-Kane, is B/C their segment closed with +400,000 viewers.

The Punk/Bryan/Ryder main event, coming off TLC, fell 3 tenths of a point below the raw averge for that show. Ryder was demoted for it.

and if Cena-Kane does porley in this week's main-event, you can bet it won't close out next week's raw. WWE is on full reactionary mode.

You guys are seeming to say merchandise sells = greater value than ratings... thats why you have no business even commenting on this.

 

[Remix]

Kotre IbushImix:

the second I shouldn't be capitalised. Just call me Kotre or Remix.

The WWE's ability to remain a global powerhouse is based purley on their ability to draw in viewers. USA pays the WWE based on what advertisers are willing to pay, based on how many viewers are watching and what demographics are being reached.

And they pay a fixed amount for the diration of their contract, which doesn't come up for renegotiation for quite a while yet. And even with the current ratings, WWE Raw is still consistently good for USA Network and has increased in all key demographics over last year.

Given that Raw is probably the USA Network's most consistent show in terms of drawing in viewers (Off the top of my head I don't think it's been watched by fewer than 4 million people this year) every single week, they're in a strong bargaining position when it comes to renegotiating.

The WWE can negotiate for a larger share of the advertising revenue if it's ratings go up. If the WWE were to start pulling in 4.0's again, They could demand a larger share of the revenue B/C advertisers would be paying more to advertise in that time slot.

Which won't ever happen.

Like-wise, If the raings go down, the advertisers pay less B/C their products are reaching less people. In the long run, this effects the WWE greatly. Especially in negotiating future deals.

And in the long run meaningless 15 minute segments won't be taken into account because they cover too much time and are too variable due to outside factors (i.e. ad breaks). Off the top of my head WCW got minute by minute ratings breakdowns during the Attitude Era, I'd be surprised if WWE didn't have access to that kind of useful information too.

Ratings are the #1 important thing to the WWE and Ryder is proof. They demoted him purley based on that.

Yeah, that report is probably bullsit conjured up to "explain" why Ryder is lower on the card this week than he was last week. A midcard champion entering into a midcard storyline with a diva he's been persuing since before he was a midcard champion? Shock fucking horror.

And if the WWE loses viewers, it means less potential PPV buys and weaker ticket sells.

WWE's viewing figures are up since last year.

Ratings = exposure. Clothing merchandise sells = less than 5% of total revenue.

And what percentage does ratings make up for WWE? 0% except for a brief period when the contract is due to be renegotiated every few years.

 

[Барбоса]

So what you are really boasting about is that it has been suggested that the WWE proved to be as reactionary in its judgement towards its new champions as you were? Well, isn't that great for everyone involved.

So what happens when Cena is sent back to the main event as WWE champion and the ratings continue to slide? Will it take the Rock's next appearance to not garner any more ratings for the penny to finally drop that the wrestling business is in a major slump and who the big belt is on and who is in the main event is not going to have that much of an impact outside of the occasional quarter hour slot rise between plays in whatever NFL game happens to be on.

 

[Daniel]

Ratings of one week mean nothing. Anyone who thought that Ryder was going to remain in the main event because he teamed with Punk and Bryan is an idiot and deserves to be told so.

That means you, Ryan69.