Why Do WWE Fans Care About Televsion Ratings?

[The Brain]

We see television rating discussed all the time here. People love to talk about how ratings are down and use that as a reason to say the WWE product sucks, at least compared to the past. Personally, I don’t care what the ratings are. I never even look at them. I don’t know why anyone else on this forum does care. Can’t you just decide for yourself if you like what you’re seeing? Do you enjoy something more just because more people watch it? What if Raw had an episode a month from now that was pretty much the same as it has been but the next day you read that episode did a 5.5 rating? Would that mean you liked it more than if the exact same show drew a 2.5 rating?

Are ratings a true indicator of quality? You’re probably thinking the higher the rating the more people are watching, and if more people are watching it must mean the product is higher in quality. That’s logical thinking I suppose. That doesn’t mean it is right. I’ve read on here so many times that people loved the WWF in 1997. Many people have said it was their favorite year. Guess what. The ratings in 1997 were about the same as the ratings in 2013. Keep that in mind next time you use ratings to support your argument.

One last question. Do you care at all about ratings of other television shows you watch? If you watch The Big Bang Theory on Thursday night do you check on Friday morning to see what the rating was? I highly doubt it. If you don’t look up the ratings for other shows why do you for wrestling? It was fun when WCW was around. You wanted your favorite organization to draw the higher rating just for some fun bragging rights. WCW has been dead for twelve years now. Let’s end the obsession with ratings. They really shouldn’t matter to the fans.

 

[boywithbluehanger]

If you go to just about any TV show forum, you'll see that online forum-participating fans for just about ANY popular television show care deeply about the ratings. It's generally because they care about the show's future on the network. With poor ratings, usually come cancellations with most shows. Also, they tend to keep a close eye on the ratings because it's one indicator of how well the show is being received. WWE fans are not even close to being the only ones who concern themselves with the happenings behind the scenes. The business side of these shows is a very frequent subject matter among shows with a strong fanbase. For example, if you go to two specific CSI forums, there's a speculative section to discuss possible directions for future storylines and outcomes for characters. There's usually a ratings thread to discuss the demographic numbers and how well the latest episode compared to other shows it was up against. It has nothing to do with fans not being able to decide whether or not they enjoy the show they're watching and everything to do with their love (sometimes obsession) of the show.

Frankly, I care about the ratings of all the shows I watch because I usually like to know if something is well-received. Often cases I'll find myself enjoying something that most people don't and then I'll see that the ratings reflect that. It lets me know ahead of time that while I enjoy it, I better not get too attached or supportive of it because chances are it'll likely change due to a majority being unimpressed. It's more of a preparation thing for me. But I'm sure that just like with everything else, everyone has their own reasons as to why they are interested in the demo results. Funny that you brought up The Big Bang Theory because it is a show that many of it's fans seem to celebrate its continued success of high viewership and ratings. Hell it's drawn comparisons to Friends a few times lately because of it!

So overall I think you should keep in mind that this is not behavior that is exclusive to fans of WWE, it's something that just about every decent-sized TV show online fanbase does. And they're not showing this level of concern for bragging rights or to decide whether or not they like something based on the number of people who watch. They do it because (just like the IWC), they care about everything that affects the future of their show.

 

[thomasgj]

The same reason music fans care about sales. It's indicative of how well our favorite wrestlers are doing. If you're favorite wrestler pulls in ratings you can take some pride in that and hope for a push or a continuation of one.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Can’t you just decide for yourself if you like what you’re seeing? Do you enjoy something more just because more people watch it?

No and yes.

No, many, many people can't decide for themselves; for those good folks, everything is determined by what other people are doing or feeling .....and yes, many folks can allow themselves to enjoy something more because they feel safety in numbers; if everyone else likes it, it must be good.....so, they're safe.

Lots of people misunderstand how the TV rating system affects things, anyway. Without going into depth, suffice it to say they believe if a show produces a few weeks of low ratings, it means the company will soon be going out of business. They don't see that the viability of a company depends on profit & loss, not TV ratings. A company may be showing low ratings, yet do a superior job of maximizing revenue while minimizing expenses.....using their resources to keep the company on an even keel. If you're profitable, you can continue.

Sure, WWE wants to maintain good ratings; it keeps investors happy while casting a positive image for public relations purposes, but by no means should TV ratings that ebb & flow on a regular basis make us believe the future of the company is strictly in the hands of Ms. Neilsen.

 

[Zeven_Zion]

It's an ego booster. A fictional one. It's "proof" that what you like is in fact good. It's "proof" that you're not stupid for enjoying a bunch of naked dudes dance. It's "proof" that you chose the right brand. It's a way to fool yourself into thinking the WWE is as great as it was and you're not an overgrown Hulkamaniac in actuality.

Also, it makes smart fans feel smarter by throwing numbers around like there's no tomorrow. They analyze it, compare it, use it as ammo. I'm pretty sure it gives at least half of them a boner every time the ratings are out and they can lay some claim using the number.

In reality, it's not an indicator of anything but popularity. Fans tend do confuse popularity and quality. Not the same thing. If it was, Justin Bieber would be loved by everyone and his music would be regarded as heavenly, while we all know that it isn't. It's like a mosquito is raping a tick in my ears. It's horrible.

But, a lot of WWE fans refuse to believe that. They think popularity equals quality. Some of them will even go as far as to say that 'Mania was a great PPV based on the PPV buys. They've said it before. That right there shows you the idiotism of some people. People pay for the PPV before they've seen it. Pretty sure that if it were the other way around, somehow, that value would be cut in half, if not less.

Checking out the ratings out of curiosity is all fine and dandy. It's a cool detail. But drawing conclusions out of it? Please, wrestling isn't that simple.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

I couldn't care less about ratings, and I've never really understood why fans do either. I mean I get why it might be interesting to see who's segements fare better on each episode of Raw, but on this forum it's generally used as a debating tool.

I like Ryback, I couldn't care less if people switch off or large numbers tune in during his segements. I don't see how this affects me in any way. I imagine the only way it would affect me is if WWE reduced or increased segements depending on ratings. And like I said, I couldn't care less about ratings so I don't know if WWE do or do not do such things.

 

[The Dragon Saga]

Ratings are more interesting to me than anything. On certain occasions they can be a measure of interest levels. If media is talking about a show all week and it pulls a bad rating then that show has bombed, if WWE put on a big main event and the rating stays the same then its an indication that it didn't appeal to enough people. It doesn't take away from the entertainment level however.

For example I watch Ring of Honor, doesn't appeal to a third or even quarter of the audience WWE or even TNA has but I find their iPPV's much more entertaining than say TNA's because the quality of wrestling is better, if the number comes in and its high that's interesting, but it doesn't effect how much I enjoyed/didn't enjoy the show.

 

[scomvp316]

-I am a wrestling junkie and I don't care about ratings
-I understand from an exec standpoint seeing ratings matter alot for sponsors to invest in your product and particular segments
-I watched WCW during the Herd days and thought it wasn't as bad as some say it was but I look at it from a fan and not so much as a critic

 

[BaconBits]

Most fans have no fucks given towards the television ratings of professional wrestling programs.

The ones that do consistently harp on/cite ratings are generally trying to justify whatever strawman argument they're trying to make that proves they're smarter than the WWE or TNA.

The only people who should actually care about ratings are the wrestling companies themselves, the networks broadcasting said wrestling companies, and potential advertisers for the programs put on by said wrestling companies.

 

[LoudClearVoice]

I only care about the ratings to see if a particular segment or hour got over with other fans. If I enjoy a segment of RAW, I want to see the ratings to see how well others liked it. Other than that, I don't really care.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Generally speaking, ratings don't do much of anything to determine whether or not I like something.

However, like a lot of pro wrestling fans today, I do tend to keep up with what kinds of numbers WWE draws. For me, it's just an interesting tidbit of information. If you're a fan of something on television, I think it's kind of natural to want the show to do well so that it stays on the air.

Ratings are often used in debates between WWE & TNA fanboys. It doesn't automatically determine which company is better or anything like that. One argument I've seen a lot of is someone claiming TNA to be the "best" wrestling company out there with the best wrestling action. A frequent counter to that argument is what the upside to being the best and having the best if nobody's tuning into see it. The big differences in ratings of WWE & TNA can lend some degree of credence to the notion that the majority of pro wrestling viewers simply don't agree with the notion of TNA being "better". Quality is always going to be subjective after all. But for fans who know & accept that pro wrestling is a business, television ratings aren't subjective. Very few things in pro wrestling are rock solid and inarguable, but not television ratings.

TNA is better to some just as WWE is better to some. What a show does in terms of ratings isn't going to really affect that viewpoint so long as you're simply enjoying what you're seeing.

 

[OneTooManyPunts]

I think a lot of people like to use the ratings as a way to justify their own opinion of the product. I've read countless posts or columns where individuals have basically used the ratings as a way of conveying that they think the product is below par.

Also, there are a lot of internet darlings out there that aren't nearly as high on the card as many would like to think they should be. If they can say a quarter hour ratings spike occured when that person was in ring or on camera, then they can immediately justify why that person should be main eventing.

The ratings matter to WWE for the cash flow and the advertisers. For fans, it's just another tool for debate.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

We see television rating discussed all the time here. People love to talk about how ratings are down and use that as a reason to say the WWE product sucks, at least compared to the past. Personally, I don’t care what the ratings are. I never even look at them. I don’t know why anyone else on this forum does care. Can’t you just decide for yourself if you like what you’re seeing?

I don't think that's fair. I don't think that is why people discuss ratings.

Do you enjoy something more just because more people watch it?

No, but I think it helps people justify their beliefs. It's also part of being a fan. You want your favorites to succeed.

What if Raw had an episode a month from now that was pretty much the same as it has been but the next day you read that episode did a 5.5 rating?

I would assume Vince bought the Neilsen company or sent Kane in to take them all hostage.

Would that mean you liked it more than if the exact same show drew a 2.5 rating?

No.

Are ratings a true indicator of quality?

No, ratings are an indicator of past quality, competing obligations, and future expectation. No one missed the initial Nexus attack because it was poor quality, they missed it because they were done watching WWE at the time or they had something better to do or they figure the last segment would be something they didn't want to see.

You’re probably thinking the higher the rating the more people are watching, and if more people are watching it must mean the product is higher in quality.

Most of the time I'm thinking about boobs.

That’s logical thinking I suppose. That doesn’t mean it is right. I’ve read on here so many times that people loved the WWF in 1997. Many people have said it was their favorite year. Guess what. The ratings in 1997 were about the same as the ratings in 2013. Keep that in mind next time you use ratings to support your argument.

Good example. The bump in ratings post 1997 was more about past quality and future expectation. Like employment with the state of the economy, ratings are a lagging indicator of quality in the WWE. Even with all the immediate information we are provided, it still takes time for most people to give something a chance. Less time now than 1997 since info flows so quickly but getting people to watch still takes time.

One last question. Do you care at all about ratings of other television shows you watch? If you watch The Big Bang Theory on Thursday night do you check on Friday morning to see what the rating was? I highly doubt it. If you don’t look up the ratings for other shows why do you for wrestling? It was fun when WCW was around. You wanted your favorite organization to draw the higher rating just for some fun bragging rights. WCW has been dead for twelve years now. Let’s end the obsession with ratings. They really shouldn’t matter to the fans.

I don't do it with other shows but I do it in other ways. I love numbers and I love trying to put numbers in to context and looking for reasons to explain those numbers. We do it all the time in sports, statistics/Sabremetrics are a very popular (batting average doesn't tell a complete story but it's something we can trust and grasp). They are just a symptom of some people's love of an industry. In wrestling, it is very hard for people like me to put talent and quality in to numbers. I'm certainly not going to give much credit to Edge's 8,639 title reigns. Ratings are about all we have to use. There are other numbers, but they tend to come from dirt sheets and directly from WWE. I don't trust anything that come from WWE. WWE is second to Donald Trump in inflating popularity, quality, and numbers.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

I do.

And I know exactly who to blame. Its the endless Monday Night Wars documentaries I've seen. I don't know if they were ever discussed by fans before the Wars. It is a part and parcel of every argument. It is the main reason why Brock and HBK's reign 'suck' which is hogwash. But over time there is this thing in the back of my head that makes me check TV rating, for whatever show I'm downloading.

BLAME IT ON BISCHOFF!

 

[Dysturbed]

We see television rating discussed all the time here. People love to talk about how ratings are down and use that as a reason to say the WWE product sucks, at least compared to the past.

I've seen that a lot and to some degree that can be true, since some people purposely don't watch now because they dislike the product, whereas years ago they loved it. If that is their own personal experience, then it is a good argument, but realistically ratings from years ago were never going to be sustained forever. Few very successful scripted shows (if any) maintain their highest levels of ratings forever. Some go off the air before they can get lower or too low, and others get low and then go off of the air. Daytime American soap operas have more shows than WWE has, but they also have lower ratings than years ago and a lot have now ceased to exist plus are repetitive from what I hear. WWE keeps on going and going. Ratings were never going to stay the same for a scripted show that aired 52, then 104 main televised shows per year.

On a side note, years ago there were people who insisted that Goldberg, Bischoff, Flair, the NWO, certain people being an eventual champ, etc would guarantee high ratings if they ever came to WWE (and they eventually did come). Anything that did help for a bit wasn't likely to give a permanent boost, but it didn't stop people from discussing potential ratings increases. In a lot of ways, I think that it is just part of the fun for some people to guess what will help and what won't. In other cases it is people using ratings to back up any positive or negative stance they have on something or someone.

Are ratings a true indicator of quality? You’re probably thinking the higher the rating the more people are watching, and if more people are watching it must mean the product is higher in quality.

That reminds me of when I go to a popular tv ratings website and if a good episode of show has lower than expected ratings people will say "I am surprised that ratings are so low when it was such a great episode." Great or not, if people weren't watching (which is reflected by the ratings estimated) then they obviously didn't know that it was great.

One last question. Do you care at all about ratings of other television shows you watch?

Compared to Raw yes I do care. I don't care about Raw's ratings because I know that WWE is very successful and not going anywhere, nor is Raw. With other shows though it is a potential concern because if a newer show has a low rating in the 18-49 demo it has a good chance of being cancelled. Knowing the main networks mostly care about who supposedly watches something live, regardless of competition and technology, I do like to see what has a better chance of lasting. These days, if a network show starts with horrible ratings, it isn't likely to suddenly get millions of new estimated fans and then last. If it starts great or decent, then there is wiggle room to get even better or lose ratings then stabilize. Every year there will be shows cancelled to make room for new ones, yet every year there are people who act like they don't understand why low(er) rated shows are maybe cancelled. Keeping up with that kind of thing isn't necessary, but does help me personally, and judging from certain sites a large number of people, have a better understanding of what to expect.

 

[DirtyD79]

Because to some fans the status of being a wrestling fan is so lowly, so pitiful that they need something, anything to justify their miserable existance. They need to believe they are hangin' with the "in" crowd. In reality unless you are buying or selling advertising space on the show or you are in charge of scheduling shows the ratings shouldn't mean a damn thing to you.

 

[SinCityBlitz]

It's not just a WWE fan thing. If TNA started beating the WWE in ratings you would have the TNA ****es talking a bunch of crap.

The ratings don't matter to me. I like what I like. I like some things that are very popular and some that people have never heard of. The ratings never dictate what I like.

A high rating doesn't mean a better show either. I remember when WCW would have a total shit show and WWF would kick ass yet WCW would win by a high margin. Vice versa too.

Ratings are very important to the company but should mean NOTHING to fans unless the ratings dip dangerously low.

 

[Alastor]

Ratings is just one of the ways fans of TV shows can identify the success of the show, and hence the success of the people behind making their favourite shows. Most fans of TV shows wants the people that make their favourite shows to be successful and rewarded for their work and also to keep the show from being cancelled.

Wrestling fans share the same mentality. Only the RAW isn't going to be cancelled but the current direction of wrestlers/storyline might be altered in the near future if ratings decline steeply. Majority of the fans just want to defend their favourite wrestler when they use ratings as an argument. I.E ratings were still shit when the other guy is there, or ratings when up during his segment, etc etc.

Personally, I do care about ratings of television shows I watch because they might get cancelled in the cut throat business of TV. If it is a popular show, I will convince myself that television finally is getting better. If it has very low ratings, I will go to hipster mode and say everyone else has lousy taste. Isn't that what we all do we ratings? To justify our viewing habits?

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

People use ratings to justify their opinions. Most people on here don't understand ratings, statistics, or business, so they use them wrong. For example: ratings in 2013 were the same as in 1997 thus, interest is the same. Completely wrong. More people have cable, so a 3 total is more people than in 1997. Also there is more competition on TV as well as more ways to watch.

Bottom line is this, you wouldn't compare how many tweets the wwe had in 1999 vs today so why the hell would you compare ratings directly? The economic and market landscape have changed drastically to the point that ratings are just a portion of interest metrics today.

 

[dman1373]

Cause people have been made to believe that whats best for buisness is best for the consumer, which isn't true. These people also like to put down others for wanting something to happen that might not be best for business. Its kind of like how mark madden called all the people marks who didn't want the rock to beat cm punk. Well yeah we are marks, and i want my guy to win. If my guy doesn't win then i get angry. Thats the fun of it.

 

[Yawa]

I don't get it because there is nothing to compare it to anymore. Until TNA goes back on Monday nights and starts pulling 2.0+ , the measuring stick is worthless. I bet if there was a way to actively track streams and DVR's, we would find a lot more than 4 to 5 million people still watch Raw. And hell even Impact would benefit.

But otherwise I agree, without a proper measuring stick, or heated competition, caring about ratings is a waste of time.

 

[flawd101]

I watch wwe online. it is hard to care about rating when you don't watch it live. i just can't stand raw rebounds and earlier in the night segments. there is at the least a complete hour of just nothing happening. often more.
wwe is a big enough company where i expect them to have a show air someplace. i have never worried about it going away. ratings are a useful tool, but i think you need to go more by the live audience. those are the people who watch every week.