Does ratings and PPV buyrates mean quality in wrestling?

[SuperSteve16]

This whole argument is stupid. Obviously ratings and PPV buyrates reflect entertainment value of the product at the time but it doesn't mean they reflect quality wrestling.
And obviously Cena draws more than Punk, though that doesnt mean Punk cant draw.
Also, both the history and Haiku agree that ratings and buyrates don't reflect quality of the product, so why the hell are you guys arguing.
Also, this is a debate about wrestling, why do you guys need to take personal attacks at each other?

 

[klunderbunker]

This whole argument is stupid. Obviously ratings and PPV buyrates reflect entertainment value of the product at the time but it doesn't mean they reflect quality wrestling.
And obviously Cena draws more than Punk, though that doesnt mean Punk cant draw.
Also, both the history and Haiku agree that ratings and buyrates don't reflect quality of the product, so why the hell are you guys arguing.
Also, this is a debate about wrestling, why do you guys need to take personal attacks at each other?

You talk to this guy for more than five minutes and see how insulting you get.

 

[SuperSteve16]

[/B]

You talk to this guy for more than five minutes and see how insulting you get.

I have a lot of respect for you and have been reading your reviews for years now, ever since you wrote your original Wrestlemania reviews, but come on man, we are all fans here. Have respect for each others opinions.

 

[Hard Hit Prince]

This right here

Shows that you know next to nothing about what you're talking about. If you honestly believe this, you have no business discussing wrestling of any sort.

I'm sorry for enjoying the Invasion angle... It's not a mark in wrestling industry right? I know that they could have made it better as I watched Vince Russo on Guest Booker give a better way to book the angle, it didn't happen as it could, but I enjoyed it for the most part and telling me that the success of the Invasion pay-per-view as nothing to do with WCW closing doors is insane.

 

[klunderbunker]

I'm sorry for enjoying the Invasion angle... It's not a mark in wrestling industry right? I know that they could have made it better as I watched Vince Russo on Guest Booker give a better way to book the angle, it didn't happen as it could, but I enjoyed it for the most part and telling me that the success of the Invasion pay-per-view as nothing to do with WCW closing doors is insane.

You.....you......you CAN'T be serious by saying this.

Ignoring that, there's also the Royal Rumble which was awesome that year, as was No Way Out. Wrestlemania was the greatest show of all time and happened six days after the WCW sale was announced, meaning it had next to nothing to do with WCW. To suggest that nothing else happened in 2001 other than WCW is absurd.

 

[klunderbunker]

I have a lot of respect for you and have been reading your reviews for years now, ever since you wrote your original Wrestlemania reviews, but come on man, we are all fans here. Have respect for each others opinions.

I do, when they're not absurd and wrong. Also if you read my reviews (thanks for that), you probably have caught on that I can be a bit of a jerk sometimes. Usually when dealing with schmucks.

 

[Hard Hit Prince]

You.....you......you CAN'T be serious by saying this.

Ignoring that, there's also the Royal Rumble which was awesome that year, as was No Way Out. Wrestlemania was the greatest show of all time and happened six days after the WCW sale was announced, meaning it had next to nothing to do with WCW. To suggest that nothing else happened in 2001 other than WCW is absurd.

I didn't say nothing else happened did I? I would love to see where you get your shit but okay. I said that WCW had to be one of the most relevant things of the year and it's a landmark in the industry. It's pretty much the day that WWE monopolized the market, so if YOU can't see the importance of that, you are an idiot. But continuing, can't the closing of WCW have been a factor for the drop of the ratings in 2002-2003? Couldn't the fact that Steve Austin and The Rock left be a factor in the drop of the ratings? Because they were so I rest my case! The fact that 2002-2003 had lower PPV buys than 2001 it doesn't mean it was because of their product, because it wasn't. It was more along the lines of not having a single guy to make you care about and not having a popular guy, those came in 2004 in the names of John Cena and Batista, ence the rise of the ratings again.

But why are another one defending Haiku? Why can't the guy show his infinite wisdom?

 

[Hard Hit Prince]

I do, when they're not absurd and wrong. Also if you read my reviews (thanks for that), you probably have caught on that I can be a bit of a jerk sometimes. Usually when dealing with schmucks.

What if you are the jerk since the get go? I mean you really believe that you are a wrestling genius of some sort. I know wrestling got you a girlfriend (I'd to like to know more about that story) and money in your pockets by writing a thing that everyone can and trying to be a Meltzer wannabe, so good for you, keep on that. I still assume that what you think is worth as much as every crap anyone says. The way I see you just have a lot of free time to manage a wrestling forum and a wrestling website which is sad and that reminds me the fact that I've been for too much now. Damn college holidays, but what am I saying, you probably never went to college - you make tons of money by review PPV and make yourself feel like you dominate the IWC.

 

[Con T.]

I didn't say nothing else happened did I? I would love to see where you get your shit but okay. I said that WCW had to be one of the most relevant things of the year and it's a landmark in the industry. It's pretty much the day that WWE monopolized the market, so if YOU can't see the importance of that, you are an idiot. But continuing, can't the closing of WCW have been a factor for the drop of the ratings in 2002-2003? Couldn't the fact that Steve Austin and The Rock left be a factor in the drop of the ratings? Because they were so I rest my case! The fact that 2002-2003 had lower PPV buys than 2001 it doesn't mean it was because of their product, because it wasn't. It was more along the lines of not having a single guy to make you care about and not having a popular guy, those came in 2004 in the names of John Cena and Batista, ence the rise of the ratings again.

But why are another one defending Haiku? Why can't the guy show his infinite wisdom?

Because when I eat, I don't particularly care about having to deal with a douchenozzle.

So riddle me this... If WCW closing played an impact, why did it affect WWE, when all of the WCW guys went to WWE in 2002-2003 anyway?

 

[Hard Hit Prince]

Because when I eat, I don't particularly care about having to deal with a douchenozzle.

So riddle me this... If WCW closing played an impact, why did it affect WWE, when all of the WCW guys went to WWE in 2002-2003 anyway?

Clearly you don't know shit about the Monday Night Wars and clearly you missed the fact that Sting never really came and that Goldberg took two years to sign, NWO guys took one year and that almost everyone that they ended up giving contracts were midcarders at best. And even your little brain can understand that the fact that a mainstream wrestling show like Nitro being cancelled was a pretty big hit in the whole market of wrestling. I believe that when WCW closed doors, there were people that just gave up watching it, but fans tried to watch WWE, just look at the Invasion PPV buyrate, a PPV in midst of July get almost three quarters of a billion buys has to be considered pretty irregular don't you think? But people didn't enjoyed with every right they have, I'm just biased on that subject as I was really into pro-WWF so I enjoyed the demise of WCW, but most people didn't and I get that.

 

[klunderbunker]

What if you are the jerk since the get go? I mean you really believe that you are a wrestling genius of some sort. I know wrestling got you a girlfriend (I'd to like to know more about that story) and money in your pockets by writing a thing that everyone can and trying to be a Meltzer wannabe, so good for you, keep on that. I still assume that what you think is worth as much as every crap anyone says. The way I see you just have a lot of free time to manage a wrestling forum and a wrestling website which is sad and that reminds me the fact that I've been for too much now. Damn college holidays, but what am I saying, you probably never went to college - you make tons of money by review PPV and make yourself feel like you dominate the IWC.

1. I'm a jerk. I never questioned that.

2. I indeed am.

3. Her name is Becca, she used to be a G-Mod here, she's British, she has brown hair and green eyes, she's obsessed with Shawn Michaels so I wrote her a porn story featuring her, Shawn Michaels and another former member of the staff here that she thoguht was hot to break the ice, she's come to see me five times, I've gone to England to see her once, I'll ask her to marry me someday. Anything else you need to know?

4. Indeed I do, and my writing is better than Meltzer. Also I'm a Scott Keith wannabe. Get your IWC celebrities straight.

5. Why would I need a job when I get paid to sit here and make fun of you?

6. I hold a bachelor's degree from the University of Kentucky, graduating in 2010 with a BA in Political Science.

7. Maybe not the IWC but I certainly dominate around here.

Anything else?

Also, reply to this in the Bar Room or GSD as we're getting off topic.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Yet you can't prove me wrong.. So how stupid are you really looking right now? Go make your reviews and believe that you really know anything about wrestling. In fact a question for you, what material is a wrestling ring really made of? Fucking twat.

Umaga pelts, next question.

 

[Hard Hit Prince]

Umaga pelts, next question.

That's just abusing me right now! I don't understand what that means.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Ratings are a reflection of past quality and future expectation with an asterisk for outside influences (other programs, DVRs, double-murder suicides, steroid trials, holidays etc.).

Past quality is probably the best indicator of long term success while future expectation has the ability to spike the ratings and other influences has the ability to make things plummet and influence trends.

 

[cult_of_icecream_bar]

Yep!It does.It means people are watching your product.And people are wise enough to watch a good product.Take Raw for the past couple of months.The ratings have sunk real low until this week's raw.Also the storylines were poor as well.So we get poor product=bad ratings.

 

[BaconBits]

The quality of the wrestling product a company puts out there is is 100% subjective. Different people want different things from their sports entertainment, and even in down periods you will find people that love the product and think it's of the highest quality.

 

[Slyfox696]

Ratings...PPV buyrates...quality.


This definitely seems like a thread for me. Whose ass do I need to kick and why?

 

[Coco]

Oh, good. Sly vs History/PWF is imminent.

If this goes into the new year, is it eligible to be a 2013 thread of the year nominee?

 

[Slyfox696]

Oh, good. Sly vs History/PWF is imminent.

If this goes into the new year, is it eligible to be a 2013 thread of the year nominee?

You should join me. Be on the winning side of a debate including Slyfox for a change.

 

[Coco]

You should join me. Be on the winning side of a debate including Slyfox for a change.

Nah. I'd rather not do all the intellectual heavy lifting just for you to take all the credit.

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

What I thought was the sound of thunder a few moments ago, may have just been the sound of Sly's hands rubbing together.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

To some, I'm sure it doesn't. However, you'd obviously be in the minority, with the majority tuning in and paying for shit. So, in short, the answer is yes.

 

[CH David]

I always forget. Do PPV buyrates account for people that watch at bars and restaurants and what not? I always go to a place with my friends since we can't really afford the PPV ourselves. There's usually a solid amount of people there too.

 

[Slyfox696]

He believes that wrestling buys mean quality

To some degree, absolutely they do. There are other factors as well, but if you're not entertaining, then no one is going to buy the show.

Even though that, DO YOU BELIEVE that fans stooped watching the WWE because the product was bad, or because their biggest stars just left?

Why are they mutually exclusive? There's a reason the "biggest stars" are just that, it's because they are the most entertaining.

But still, WWE's ratings nowadays are lower than any others from the past 10 years. Was it the product? Talk about the subject and say why do you believe people stooped watching wrestling because of HHH reign of terror.

First of all, the word is "stopped", not "stooped". You've said it twice now.

Second of all the landscape of television is far different today than it was 10 years ago. More channels, more options, better original programming, DVR, Internet streaming, etc.

First of all, why do some of you guys (Haiku) care so much about "Who draws" or "Who doesn't draw"? Isn't that WWE's job to think that not a fan's?

Because, as fans, we like to understand why things happen the way they do. Instead of bitching and moaning about why overrated IWC hack #1 isn't wrestling for the title, we understand he's not wrestling for the title because no one outside of the IWC gives two fucks about him.

That's why we care.

I have a lot of respect for you and have been reading your reviews for years now, ever since you wrote your original Wrestlemania reviews, but come on man, we are all fans here. Have respect for each others opinions.

The young ones are always so naive.

Couldn't the fact that Steve Austin and The Rock left be a factor in the drop of the ratings? Because they were so I rest my case! The fact that 2002-2003 had lower PPV buys than 2001 it doesn't mean it was because of their product, because it wasn't.

So what your saying is that when two great and entertaining wrestlers left, taking their entertainment value with them, PPV buys and ratings dropped.

Now, I've only half paid attention to the debate in this thread, but when you lose two of the greatest wrestlers ever, the quality of the product is going to drop. That's really just common sense.

Damn college holidays, but what am I saying, you probably never went to college - you make tons of money by review PPV and make yourself feel like you dominate the IWC.

I'm sorry...but did you, as a college student, really just criticize someone for how they make money?

3. Her name is Becca, she used to be a G-Mod here, she's British, she has brown hair and green eyes, she's obsessed with Shawn Michaels so I wrote her a porn story featuring her, Shawn Michaels and another former member of the staff here that she thoguht was hot to break the ice, she's come to see me five times, I've gone to England to see her once, I'll ask her to marry me someday. Anything else you need to know?

Yes...why the fuck did you just tell us you wrote a porn about your girlfriend, Norcal and HBK?

Some things just don't need to be said, man.

The quality of the wrestling product a company puts out there is is 100% subjective.

100% false. If it were 100% subjective, there would be no rhyme or reason why certain stories or wrestlers work, but we know that is not true.

 

[Con T.]

Well, in all fairness
He didn't mention NorCal
So there's that, brother.

By the way, do note that History has gone off running. I wouldn't doubt he'll put you on ignore the minute he reads this, no matter how rational that is