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

[ryan86]

Remix:

You are arguing symantics.

Also your facts are totaly wrong.

Attendance and ratings are down 7% and 6% respectivly, from the 3rd quarter of '10.

Also ratings are down about 800,000 viewers and attendance is down from 6,200 to 4,900 since 2009. PPV buys are down 11% from 2009.

-In 2009, the WWE averaged 5.3 million viewers.
-In 2011, the WWE has averaged 4.5 million viewers.

PPV buys down 11% since 2009
Attendance down 1,300 from 2009

I wonder what is driving those decreases? PEOPLE TUNING OUT. RATINGS DECREASING.

Ratings drive ticket sales and PPV buys. The WWE is well aware of this and is why they compete for the ratings. Ratings almost drove WWE out of business by 1997, while those SAME ratings were driving WCW to a power house, then out of business.

For you to sit here and say ratings today don't matter, and that clothing merchandise sells are the allmighty, is psycho talk.

WWE is more of a weekly TV drama series, than a wrestling company. And ratings are THE objective.

 

[ryan86]

Coninuation:

4th quarter results are about to come in and they are going to be dismal. From the preliminary information, PPV buys will round out to about 194,000 per PPV. The TLC results are looking to drag that slightly down. Also, Attendance from it's live events has seen a 6% decrease in revenue, numbers not yet know. So either ticket prices were lowered 6% or tickets bought were down 6%. You guess. And Ratings will show a 5-7% decrease. People are tuning out, but tuning in to other programing.

With a 2nd consecutive quarter of bad news, and 6 consecutive months of a Punk push, one has to question his drawing power. Bryan will fare NO better, and Ryder was a short term merchandise gig that had a quick expiration date, LIKE I SAID.

The return of the UT, Rock, and possibly Jericoh for WM season should inject a short term fix, but this ROH experiment going on in the WWE may have the IWC excited, but the people who WWE cares about, (the one's who are tuning out), need to put punk in a stronger position.

 

[Canadian Ninja]

Remix:

You are arguing symantics.

Also your facts are totaly wrong.

Attendance and ratings are down 7% and 6% respectivly, from the 3rd quarter of '10.

Also ratings are down about 800,000 viewers and attendance is down from 6,200 to 4,900 since 2009. PPV buys are down 11% from 2009.

-In 2009, the WWE averaged 5.3 million viewers.
-In 2011, the WWE has averaged 4.5 million viewers.

PPV buys down 11% since 2009
Attendance down 1,300 from 2009

I wonder what is driving those decreases? PEOPLE TUNING OUT. RATINGS DECREASING.

Ratings drive ticket sales and PPV buys. The WWE is well aware of this and is why they compete for the ratings. Ratings almost drove WWE out of business by 1997, while those SAME ratings were driving WCW to a power house, then out of business.

For you to sit here and say ratings today don't matter, and that clothing merchandise sells are the allmighty, is psycho talk.

WWE is more of a weekly TV drama series, than a wrestling company. And ratings are THE objective.

That, my dear delusional friend, is a farce that doesn't even follow your own arguements. You've said to ignore the IWC and get casual fans to tune in and show up. Casual fans don't pay attention to the ratings of the shows, nor should wrestling fans in general pay attention to them as they do not concern us. So no, ratings do not drive ticket sales or PPV buys. No one watches wrestling for the TV ratings. Ratings just say x amount of people watched during this portion. What we as fans watch week to week, what takes place on TV and in the ring drives ticket sales and PPV buys. If the stories on TV do not interest fans, they won't by the PPVs. TV drives PPV and ticket sales, NOT the ratings.

Also, officials are discussing Michael Cole and him burying talent. So lets look at this info here. 2009 didn't have a heel commentator. 2010 and 2011 did. 2009 had a higher veiwership compared to 2011. During 2011 they've had one of the main voices heard week in and week out burying everyone, saying "this show sucks". Casual fans will tune out all because they are being told "this show sucks." See a trend here?

 

[Goliath Uterus]

whadya know, another terrible thread by ryan.

 

[ryan86]

Canadian Ninja:

Are you so damn ignorant that you can't understand that ratings are the same thing as viewership? So when someone referrs to ratings, they mean people tuning in, or people tuning out? And do you not understand that people tuning in means that more people find the product entertaining? When that happens, more people buy PPV's. And more people buy tickets. BECAUSE MORE PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED TO TUNE IN.

And when people tune out, less people buy PPV's and less people buy tickets. Exposure is the WWE's #1 goal. And ratings equal exposure. The higher the rating, the higher the exposure.

And to blame the trend on micheal cole... WTF!!!

Ratings are the trend you idiot.

 

[FlexAmerican Dynamite]

Are you really this hell bent on trying to get the internet to hate Zack Ryder. I think a better question is why are we still posting on his threads?

 

[ryan86]

Are you really this hell bent on trying to get the internet to hate Zack Ryder. I think a better question is why are we still posting on his threads?

I am not trying to get anyone to hate anyone. I made an analysis on Ryder; that he was a short term merchandising gig with a quick expiration date and all of you called me an idiot. 9 days later i am proved right. so I pointed it out. and you guys are hell bent on being too immature to say you were wrong.

 

[Serious Mozzarella]

I am not trying to get anyone to hate anyone. I made an analysis on Ryder; that he was a short term merchandising gig with a quick expiration date and all of you called me an idiot. 9 days later i am proved right. so I pointed it out. and you guys are hell bent on being too immature to say you were wrong.

Except that's wrong. The WWE never even attempted to do anything with him. He did it all on his own, because he was selling his own merchandise, by himself.

 

[Canadian Ninja]

Canadian Ninja:

Are you so damn ignorant that you can't understand that ratings are the same thing as viewership? So when someone referrs to ratings, they mean people tuning in, or people tuning out? And do you not understand that people tuning in means that more people find the product entertaining? When that happens, more people buy PPV's. And more people buy tickets. BECAUSE MORE PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED TO TUNE IN.

And when people tune out, less people buy PPV's and less people buy tickets. Exposure is the WWE's #1 goal. And ratings equal exposure. The higher the rating, the higher the exposure.

And to blame the trend on micheal cole... WTF!!!

Ratings are the trend you idiot.

And to blame the trend on Ryder, Daniel Bryan and CM Punk when none of them have been where they are for the entirety of the falling rating... WTF!!!

No, I'm not ignorant by any means. Yes, I know ratings shows people tuning in and out. Do I care? No, as the ratings don't matter to me. Just like critics opinions on movies that I find entertaining. It's a matter of opinion. The ratings can say the show tanked, but if I was entertained then the ratings are a moot point because I THE FAN enjoyed the show. You're blaming something on people who are not on screen or whose voice is not heard for the entirety of the two hours. Going by your very own logic, of Kane and Cena's segment do horribly they should lose their spots right? To make an unbiased judgement to trends occuring, you must take into account ALL factors of the subject at which the trend is being drawn from. You blame CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, and Zack Ryder for 10-15 minutes of screen time as the reason for horrible ratings. What about ADR? What about Ziggler? Miz? What about the atrocious commentating of Michael Cole? Who of those six named individuals are heard from for over 2 hours? Cole. Who, since 2009, has been constantly heard from? Cole. Also, ADR was the main focus for most of the decline and was in the same segment as the aforementioned ratings drop. Why not put some of the blame on him? You claim to be making an unbiased opinion, but pointing your finger at the guys you don't like as the cause. That is not unbiased.

Yes, ratings show people tuning in and out. People tune out for a multitude of reasons, which ratings do not show. Sports games for instance. Seeing as Christmas just went passed, reasons for the holidays. Ratings don't show every facet of reasons why someone tunes out, just that the show had such a rating. Ratings mean nothing as all it is is a number, with very little information behind it. I don't watch sports, so I can spend my monday nights watching RAW. I've got a friend who who likes WWE, but watches other sports, who will tune out for games. Do the ratings give you that information? No, didn't think so. That is why people say the ratings don't matter, as there is very little facts behind the numbers. John Cena has garnered low ratings, were they his fault? Nope. Edge got one of the highest ratings in years for his Live Sex Celebrations the night after he won the WWE Championship. Shortly after that, he lost the belt and was back in the mid-card for months. If ratings determined who should be where on the card, Edge wouldn't have lost his first WWE Championship back to John Cena, who had never drawn the ratings Edge did. So here are more facts to show you that a rating doesn't matter to fans, only executives. And you can brag about your BA in PoliSci, and your minor in economics all you want. No one cares, you're just some Internet Wrestling Fan, like the rest of us here.

 

[ryan86]

Except that's wrong. The WWE never even attempted to do anything with him. He did it all on his own, because he was selling his own merchandise, by himself.

Ya, that was my point. My main DAMN point was that the WWE was never serios about him. And that B/C of that he would be used as a quick money making gig and a fast aproaching expiration date, that would make him an afterthought.

You guys called me an idiot.

Now that I was proven right, your moving the goal-post on what all of you said about my prediction.

Just be a man and say, "Ryan, sorry for jumping the gunn on you, maybe you were right".

A lot of terrible things have been said about me and my post. All of my predictions, wrather it be Punk not drawing ratings, Ryder not being used serious, and slow-down needed on the Bryan push... They have all been on the mark. All the evidence of the past 10 weeks, or 6 months when regarding Punk's claim to "change", has all backed me up.

 

[BK Styles]

Please, please, please learn to spell. Or at least proof-read. It isn't hard. It really isn't, I promise.

Now, I'm gonna say something to you I've repeated a number of times...


GIVE

IT

TIME.

Seriously, Bryan and Ryder have just become champs, and you wanna bash them because of something you've read on a wrestling website? First, the trend won't just break like that, it takes time, so stop being a whiny bitch and wait and see how things pan out. Patience. And second; whilst yes, websites can at times be reliable. But unless I missed Taker and Sting get it on at 'Mania, and Bill Goldberg get inducted into the HOF, then they can also be wrong. And I don't think I'm that unobservant.

The programme has been losing ratings for a while, BEFORE they both won their titles. Hell, even before Punk won his. People have talked enough about Monday Night football, so I won't continue with that. But heres my question: do you think the ratings would be different if they put the WHC and US titles on different people, or not have them change hands at all? Anyone on the current active roster could have won those belts and the ratings would hardly change.

You also seem to be forgetting something. Ryder is a midcarder. This is exemplified by the fact that he has the US Title; the midcarder belt. Here's a clue as to where he belongs in the programming as a result: MIDcarder. He won't and should not main event weekly. The odd one won't hurt.

Bryan is a Smackdown superstar. Yes, he will be on Raw at times because it is a Supershow. But if I watch Raw, I do not expect to see him. If I want to see Bryan, I'll watch Smackdown, not Raw.

Good luck with getting out the prison. Tell you what, keep telling Slyfox to let you out. Keep telling him how good you are. Keep telling him, instead of laying low, posting threads in here that aren't designed to make you out as some kind of pseudo-psychic martyr against the IWC that generally tell everyone how 'good' you are, and prove your worth without mouthing off like a twat. No, instead, just keep telling Sly you should be out of here. Brilliant plan. I'm sure it'll work about as well as a chocolate teapot.

You really are quite stupid.

 

[FlexAmerican Dynamite]

I am not trying to get anyone to hate anyone. I made an analysis on Ryder; that he was a short term merchandising gig with a quick expiration date and all of you called me an idiot. 9 days later i am proved right. so I pointed it out. and you guys are hell bent on being too immature to say you were wrong.

You weren't proved right though.....you waited at the homepage looking for any rumor saying that Ryder,Bryan,or Punk would get depushed.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Wow, I can't remember a wrestling related prison thread get this many posts in one day.

On the subject, I think anyone buying in to the idea that Ryder is getting pushed out of the main event scene is a moron. Not because he is getting pushed out but because he was never in the main event scene. A pursuit of Eve is a good storyline for him. He can show personality beyond the catch phrases and fist pumping and he can hold the title without having to beat any legit names for the title.

P.S. - second hour of Raw was up in viewership compared to the first from 12/26. Ryan86 is going to have to change his Master's thesis. I give credit to the writers for properly promoting Punk's gauntlet with the possibility of him getting his hands on Ace and the promise of Kane speaking to further the Kane/Cena storyline.

 

[ryan86]

BK 201:

Now you are a person I think has an understanding of general knowlege. I can debate you W/O feeling like your an ignorant-poor-lost-soul. The other two I was debating were like children with a verry crude understanding of business. One had no idea that WWE is a business first, the other had no idea that advertising revenue generated more money than clothing merchandise sells. I have hope for you.

But come on my friend, you have to understand that 17 weeks of losing viewers in the second half, 10 consecutive over-all drops, and a 400,000 viewership loss in a main event that featured your top two champs is a concern. The show average was a 2.92, the main event drew a 2.5 and 2.6 (OR). Mean while, the Cena-Kane segment gained 400,000 viewers. So the WWE placed Cena-Kane in the main-event the following week. And Left Punk right under that. They are reacting by the quarter hour, to see what is grabing fan interest, then placing them in strategic spots to up the full rating. This is very shakey.

 

[ryan86]

Wow, I can't remember a wrestling related prison thread get this many posts in one day.



P.S. - second hour of Raw was up in viewership compared to the first from 12/26. Ryan86 is going to have to change his Master's thesis. I give credit to the writers for properly promoting Punk's gauntlet with the possibility of him getting his hands on Ace and the promise of Kane speaking to further the Kane/Cena storyline.

Nope, It only backs up what I have said. Cena-Kane drew +400,000 viewers. Punk, the week before, lost .3 off the average. They got into reactionary mode and put what was gaining viewers, as the main event. And it worked. I called for it and said that was the right thing to do. So when you look deep inside the numbers, it tells you Cena-Kane can hold and gain, while Punk is best set as the "glue guy".

My point has been validated.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Do you believe Ryder was ever getting a main event push?

So how long before Punk, Ryder and Bryan lose their titles for good and who do they lose to?

 

[ryan86]

Do you believe Ryder was ever getting a main event push?

So how long before Punk, Ryder and Bryan lose their titles for good and who do they lose to?

I always knew Ryder would never get a real main-event push. I just saw him as an unserious charachter, who was a very short term merchandise gig, with an expiration date faster than Bin-Laden sourrounded by J-SOC team of Navy Seals. I didnt like the fact that so many people were comparing him to Cena and were making such crazy claims as him as a part of the Main-event future. Tons of posters were spewing that crap so i gave them a dose of realty.

Bryan has an expiration date aproaching as well. His run to being champ was built in a horrific manner and I begged that they slow his rise, to allow for propper grooming. Big Show and Henry were producing very positive trends for SD, and the title should be on Big Show.

Punk will be a permanent main-event main-stay, and play second to Rock-Cena. he is a good glue guy.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

I don't know who was comparing Cena and Ryder or assuming that Ryder was going to get a main event push in the near term. There are a lot of young kids that participate on this forum. Wrestling fans are also not known for being geniuses. Ryder is a far cry from Cena in ability or popularity. Time will tell on Ryder's future. He certainly needs more humanity added to his character to get himself further over. He probably doesn't have the look or acting chops to be a top guy.

The rest of your last post sound very reasonable. Like I said before not everyone is a genius on this forum. Being right able or able to predict the future of wrestling is no great accomplishment and certain not worth rubbing in others faces.

 

[ryan86]

I don't know who was comparing Cena and Ryder or assuming that Ryder was going to get a main event push in the near term. There are a lot of young kids that participate on this forum. Wrestling fans are also not known for being geniuses. Ryder is a far cry from Cena in ability or popularity. Time will tell on Ryder's future. He certainly needs more humanity added to his character to get himself further over. He probably doesn't have the look or acting chops to be a top guy.

The rest of your last post sound very reasonable. Like I said before not everyone is a genius on this forum. Being right able or able to predict the future of wrestling is no great accomplishment and certain not worth rubbing in others faces.

GSB... Can I call you that?

I was reacting to the tons of people who WERE saying that about Ryder. Go back through my the first "Bryan and Ryder De-Push" thread and you will see it everywhere.

I dont want to insult YOU. And NEVER will.

 

[ryan86]

Canadian Ninga:

Remix:

One last thing to school you on. WWE is a publicly traded company, which means they have share-holders.

And the every day focus of the WWE is to the Share-Holders.

When the price of a share of WWE stock goes up, so does the net-worth/Market share/ and purchasing power of the WWE.

When large share-holder investors see ratings trending in decline, they get verry anxious. It is Vince's job as Chairman to keep his share holder board confident. This is a $749 million investment machine, and money is the object. No-one is trying to lose, or they back out and sell cheap, which lowers the IPO value sending stock prices down. That in-turn depleats the value of the WWE, and forces a revaluation in-line with stock market inflationary practices, mainly due to quanatative easing; QE1/QE2.

So this may explain to you how reactionary the WWE is about their weekly ratings and why the product focus seems to fluctuate so often. Dont ever challenge me (part of my degree was economics)

 

[The Dragon Saga]

So how long before Punk, Ryder and Bryan lose their titles for good and who do they lose to?

Cody Rhodes will compete three times in one night and capture all three title belts, not even breaking a sweat, fulfilling Ryan's homoerotic fantasy and allowing him to hang himself a miserable yet slightly less miserable man.

 

[CraigThe13th]

I always knew Ryder would never get a real main-event push. I just saw him as an unserious charachter, who was a very short term merchandise gig, with an expiration date faster than Bin-Laden sourrounded by J-SOC team of Navy Seals. I didnt like the fact that so many people were comparing him to Cena and were making such crazy claims as him as a part of the Main-event future. Tons of posters were spewing that crap so i gave them a dose of realty.

Bryan has an expiration date aproaching as well. His run to being champ was built in a horrific manner and I begged that they slow his rise, to allow for propper grooming. Big Show and Henry were producing very positive trends for SD, and the title should be on Big Show.

Punk will be a permanent main-event main-stay, and play second to Rock-Cena. he is a good glue guy.

You could have avoided loads of shit if you posted like this in the 1st place. I don't agree with some of it but I respect it, mainly about Daniel Bryan being a short term thing. Agreed his push was hot shotted, but it happened to Orton,Punk and others and yeah it was too soon for them and they didn't look convincing in their 1st title runs. They were both ready the next time though. I feel the same will be true for D-Bryan.

 

[Bill Lesnar]

agreed that Show should have held onto the belt. Bill lesnar was holding out for Bryan to win at Mania vs either Show or Henry. Ah wel

 

[ryan86]

You could have avoided loads of shit if you posted like this in the 1st place. I don't agree with some of it but I respect it, mainly about Daniel Bryan being a short term thing. Agreed his push was hot shotted, but it happened to Orton,Punk and others and yeah it was too soon for them and they didn't look convincing in their 1st title runs. They were both ready the next time though. I feel the same will be true for D-Bryan.

Randy Orton was 23 and 24 durring his first push that flopped. But had 4 more years of grooming before he led the WWE to their best year in '09 (Best since 2001 in terms of PPV Buys, Attendance figures, over-all viewship, and total revenue collected, before and after profit.)

Bryan does not have the charisma, character, look, mic skills, youth, size, up-side potential, or in-ring athletic ability that Orton possessed.

All Bryan does is try and do his kicks and wrestling moves as quick as possible and for some reason that makes him the best? NO

 

[Harthan]

It's crazy how Bryan has been champion for a month and yet is responsible for tanking the WWE's ratings in 2011.

He must be really bad.