Ratings are in, Now With Quarter Hours

[nzubeagha95]

so with all the ex-wwe star that ''debuted'' wwe got more than twice their ratings

 

[Turd Ferguson]

I just read, it was 1.5 for Impact and 3.6 for Raw.

Overall, it's a .7 drop in ratings for the business, which isn't good at all.

It's the Bizarro Monday Night War!

 

[Coco]

What happened between quater six and seven of iMPACT?

 

[Uncle Sam]

There's only one man that could cause a drop like that. Kevin Nash.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Bubba and the Beer Money vs. Jarrett match was even lower then Nash and The Band segment. The lowest being the main event which was promoted to death. The highest rated skits for Impact were the Beautiful People and Pope interview, along with the Sting vs. RVD match.

 

[Turd Ferguson]

* Q1 – 0.99: Hogan and Abyss vs. AJ and Flair/Sting Returns
* Q2 – 0.98: AJ and Flair Interview/Kazarian, Daniels, Williams, Bischoff Promo
* Q3 – 1.0: Kazarian, Daniels, Williams X-Title Match/Shannon Moore Returns/Knockouts Tag Title Match
* Q4 – 1.07: D'Angelo Dinero Interview/Beautiful People Interview/Sting vs. RVD

* Q5 - 1.07: Sting Beats Down RVD, Hogan Appearance/Nash and Young Promo With The Band
* Q6 – 1.03: Nash and Young Promo With The Band Cont./Eric Young vs. Sean Waltman/Angle Interview With Soldiers, Anderson Beatdown
* Q7 – 0.95: Bubba Talks To Hogan/JJ and Foley Talk/Beer Money vs. JJ
* Q8 – 0.76: Abyss and Hogan Promo/Hogan and Abyss vs. AJ and Flair
* Overrun was a 1.01: Hogan and Abyss vs. AJ and Flair/Jeff Hardy Returns

Bubba and Jarrett = RATINGS

 

[Papa Shango]

Why? Do you think that TNA will get better ratings or better advertising in that same Monday slot?

Ratings. Not unless their product gets waaayyyy better. Advertising? Technically, yeah, but only because advertisers pay more to air on Monday. Monday television now is like what Thursdays were in the 90's and early 2000's. But like I said, if the ratings are bad, they won't get the advertisers.

The potential for growth is quite great in the Monday slot,

The potential for growth is quite great... if they can convince viewers that they have a better product than RAW. And in its current form, it's not going to do that.

and nothing Spike could put there will do better.

You're right. Probably not. But Spike would be better off trying to find some form of counter-programming. Unfortunately, they're not going to be able to do that, because they cater to male viewers, and Mondays are dominated by Raw, MNF, and Network programming. So unless Spike TV changes it's key target demographic, they aren't going to be able to compete on Monday nights.

Why would they move it back to Thursdays?

Because Thursdays are no longer as competitive as it used to be. And it's definitely NOWHERE near as competitive as Monday nights are.

TNA just grabbed 1.0 rating going head to head with the 17 year old flagship show of the #1 promotion in the world, during the buildup to the biggest PPV show in the world. Why do people think the 1.0 is a bad rating?

Because of all the hype, all the advertising, all the ads they managed to get affiliates to air during RAW, all the promises of returns and debuts, and Hogan talking smack about how the Monday night Wars are back on. And they got 1.0, which IS a bad rating. TNA and Spike will try to spin it as best they can, but internally, they are definitely disappointed with that number. Internally, they thought they could pull at LEAST that 1.4 they got back in January.

If you need more convincing, go look on any website that tracks television ratings. They will ALL say that Impact did BAD. My favorite headline so far? "WWE Raw lays the smackdown on TNA Impact.

I anxiously await to see how Slyfox manages to convince himself that he knows better than people whose JOB it is to analyze television ratings data.

 

[Slyfox696]

And they got 1.0, which IS a bad rating. TNA and Spike will try to spin it as best they can, but internally, they are definitely disappointed with that number. Internally, they thought they could pull at LEAST that 1.4 they got back in January.

If you need more convincing, go look on any website that tracks television ratings. They will ALL say that Impact did BAD. My favorite headline so far? "WWE Raw lays the smackdown on TNA Impact.

I anxiously await to see how Slyfox manages to convince himself that he knows better than people whose JOB it is to analyze television ratings data.

Please explain how a 1.0 is a bad rating. Disappointing? Okay, perhaps. But please explain how it's a bad rating. They just carried over most of their audience from last week's show, and did so against Monday Night Raw. While I have ZERO idea if this statement is accurate or not, I would imagine that TNA drew every bit as well as any other show in that timeslot.

How is a 1.0 a bad rating?

 

[*The Legend Killer*]

My dad made a point, saying that the basketball tournaments started on Monday....not sure if that affected anything though. Honestly, both shows did bad (ratings wise). RAW is down. TNA is just about average. Personally I thought RAW was the better show, but TNA has some balls stepping up to the big dog. What's going to be interesting though is to see how both shows do next week; I'm looking forward to it.

 

[Papa Shango]

Please explain how a 1.0 is a bad rating. Disappointing? Okay, perhaps. But please explain how it's a bad rating. They just carried over most of their audience from last week's show, and did so against Monday Night Raw. While I have ZERO idea if this statement is accurate or not, I would imagine that TNA drew every bit as well as any other show in that timeslot.

How is a 1.0 a bad rating?

"Bad" might be an overstatement. But definitely not good, considering that you would have to think that TNA and Spike had to put a decent amount of money into advertising. A billboard in Times Square. that is NOT cheap.

Spike is claiming to be happy with the 1.0, because there was no drop off from the Thursday show. But again, with the amount of money they've spent touting the move, TNA can't be willing to settle for a 1.0. I talked to my friend's dad today, real cool guy, big Ric Flair fan lol, anyway he's in advertising. He said given the amount of advertising TNA's done, in order to break even, they need ALL their advertisers to stay with them through the next LIVE episode. So unless all their sponsors are contracted to advertise, they will have a tough time justifying the cost of airing Impact against Raw.

 

[Slyfox696]

"Bad" might be an overstatement. But definitely not good, considering that you would have to think that TNA and Spike had to put a decent amount of money into advertising. A billboard in Times Square. that is NOT cheap.

Spike is claiming to be happy with the 1.0, because there was no drop off from the Thursday show. But again, with the amount of money they've spent touting the move, TNA can't be willing to settle for a 1.0. I talked to my friend's dad today, real cool guy, big Ric Flair fan lol, anyway he's in advertising. He said given the amount of advertising TNA's done, in order to break even, they need ALL their advertisers to stay with them through the next LIVE episode. So unless all their sponsors are contracted to advertise, they will have a tough time justifying the cost of airing Impact against Raw.

Wait, let me see if I got this right. You're claiming now to know better than the people at Spike what they want? Well, that's just great. Especially after you falsely and pre-emptively accused me of trying to claim I know better than nameless analysts, you're now trying to say you know what Spike TV wants more than Spike does. That's great.

What's your next trick? Are you going to try and tell us you know better than Oprah Winfrey on how she wants to spend her money? Perhaps you can tell me what I will eat for supper tonight.

The fact of the matter is, and this is what IWC fans don't understand, is that ratings are only as good as the network thinks they are. And Spike has never said ANYTHING but positive things about the ratings TNA has gotten. Perhaps you should keep that in mind when you spout ridiculous statements in the future.