MonteCarl Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 I don't see Bayley as a "teenage girl" type wrestler. She likely appeals more to the younger girls, whereas Sasha would totally be who the teenage girls would flock to. Also, how do they get this information? How do they have such a system in place as to be able to track what teenage girls are watching down to the minute of a wrestling show. Seems so oddly specific of a demographic. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiji Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 Nielsen boxes have demographics information of the people who use their boxes or whatever it is they use to track viewers to now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SorceressKnight Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 46 minutes ago, Craig H said: No link, but Alvarez and Dave were talking about 38% of teenage girls tuning out for Bayley's win against Charlotte. They were talking about how that's indicative of Bayley not being a hit with a demographic they thought she reached. I'm sitting there thinking that maybe, MAYBE, it's because their match started at 10:50 PM and went past 11 PM and I can't see many pre-teen or teenage girls staying up that late to watch wrestling when there's school the next day. How about, I don't know, you program to the audience you want to keep or build. Put that fucking match on at 10 PM or something. This would make some sense- I think in one of Foley's books, he talked about how the WWE was ready to give up on the Hardy Boyz in 2000 because every time they had a main event, it was ratings poison. Finally, Foley (claimed) he was the one who said "Uh...their major fanbase is kids. You ever think that the reason is maybe because the main event is past their bedtime?" The end result- whether he said it or someone else did- they moved the Hardys' match to 10PM, and the Hardyz instantly became good ratings draws. That'd likely be the same for Bayley (and may even need to move her to 9 PM, since she might be more a pre-teen or younger girls hit instead.) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nice Guy Eddie Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 47 minutes ago, MonteCarl said: Also, how do they get this information? How do they have such a system in place as to be able to track what teenage girls are watching down to the minute of a wrestling show. Seems so oddly specific of a demographic. Jerry Lawler 20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Iron Yuppie Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 6 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said: Jerry Lawler 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spritenaut 32 Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 11 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said: Jerry Lawler If the Batmobile ever cruises through my neighborhood, I'm damn well making my daughters come indoors. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon-E Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 I've asked this before but nobody replied. Was Booker T during his WWE run treated better than Christian? Someone on another forum said that Booker was more over than Christian but i'm not sure if that's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolfan in NYC Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 :-/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig H Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 That is sad, but I'm not going to lie... I read that entire piece in Bob Backlund's crazy voice and the last part came across as him screaming. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianS81177 Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 God damn. Vader, Ivan Koloff and George Steele are all dying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbarrie Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 3 hours ago, Oyaji said: The ratings say otherwise. Huge drop offs in the third hour compared to the first two. Doesn't matter. As SorceressKnight said, if it really costs the same for a three-hour show as a two-hour, unless ratings for the third hour drop to zero, you're better off having it. Though I doubt the cost really is the same. More likely that cost was an average or something. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiji Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 Or USA has a show that can do better than the big drop off third hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisM Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 3 hours ago, Oyaji said: Nielsen boxes have demographics information of the people who use their boxes or whatever it is they use to track viewers to now. Nielsen may be the only game in town when it comes to television ratings, but it's still an antiquated model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbarrie Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 11 minutes ago, Oyaji said: Or USA has a show that can do better than the big drop off third hour. I'm pretty sure she was talking about WWE's point of view, not USA's. Besides, it's USA. They totally do not have a show that can do better than Raw, even if Raw is underperforming. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPPA Posted February 16, 2017 Author Share Posted February 16, 2017 I am just quoting myself because it was brought up in the thread. My big issue with the discussion that Dave and Bryan had - and it was mostly Dave was he instantly went THIS PROVES BAYLEY ISN'T A DRAW Dave is also of the notion that no one changes the channel back and forth because it was like WHY WOULD THEY SWITCH TO THE DOG SHOW AT 10? IF THEY WERE GOING TO WATCH IT THEY WOULD HAVE ALREADY!!!! Anyway - eventually he did phrase it as "Something made them switch at 10 pm." Of course - that is somehow Bayley's fault (and solely Bayley's) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPPA Posted February 16, 2017 Author Share Posted February 16, 2017 And for the millionth time - the decision to have 3 hours is USA's not the WWEs (not that they are complaining about it either) It is part of the TV contract so it wouldn't change until the new contract This past Monday only ONE show did better than any hour of RAW in the 18-49 rating and in terms of people physically watching - all 3 hours of RAW where the most watched cable show on TV Monday Wrestling ratings are down from their really highs - it is still better than anything else they are putting on (when MNF isn't on) 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy LaRue Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 4 hours ago, MonteCarl said: I don't see Bayley as a "teenage girl" type wrestler. She likely appeals more to the younger girls, whereas Sasha would totally be who the teenage girls would flock to. This, to the letter. Which makes how they're using Sasha confusing. In Bayley and Sasha, they have two women who can bring in two demographic groups WWE wants. I know Sasha is a better heel promo but in terms of what to market, her as a cool babyface seems the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Austin Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 And with more tv options becoming available, ie Netflix, Amazon, Hulu original content, etc, ratings will continue to not look as good as it did compared to the Attitude era, which is why I believe the WWE trouts out those other numbers, trending, YouTube views and all that as positives because fans are using other methods as well as tv to consume their WWE wants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy LaRue Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 I think those obsessed with WWE ratings forget how much TV viewing has changed for everything. Couple that with wrestling becoming more and more niche in some ways, and 3 to 3.5 million viewers per week is what you'll get for Raw. No doubt WWE would like higher ratings, but anyone thinking they're going to double viewership in today's entertainment climate is kidding themselves. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEN! Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 The women are supposed to attract teenage girls? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ziggy Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 Its Unfortunate that Vader is seemingly giving up because my Dad is in a similar situation because he was diagnosed with Multiple Myeloma Cancer at stage 4 in October, I put him on a plant base diet and having him going the holistic route and he is off the Chemo and he is making great progress so Im kinda sad at Vaders grim tweets as it he has no hope. I know a cleaner diet is apart of DDPs program and that makes a difference big time depending on how disaplined you are. The Heart is definitely an organ/muscle that can be repaired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy LaRue Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 18 minutes ago, BEN! said: The women are supposed to attract teenage girls? From an aspirational POV, yes. And let's be honest, some girls may find female stars more attractive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonteCarl Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 I'll say that the "Bella Army" is strong among the younger teen females. I know this because a few weeks back I went to a SD house show and was live tweeting it, including post match pictures of the winners. I was still getting likes and retweets about Nikki Bella winning her match up until last week. Between that and the likes/retweets of my Dean Ambrose victory pic, my Twitter had never seen such attention. It was quite annoying after awhile and I'm glad it finally calmed down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuerrillaMonsoon Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Burgundy LaRue said: From an aspirational POV, yes. And let's be honest, some girls may find female stars more attractive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie M. Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 2 hours ago, RIPPA said: I am just quoting myself because it was brought up in the thread. My big issue with the discussion that Dave and Bryan had - and it was mostly Dave was he instantly went THIS PROVES BAYLEY ISN'T A DRAW Dave is also of the notion that no one changes the channel back and forth because it was like WHY WOULD THEY SWITCH TO THE DOG SHOW AT 10? IF THEY WERE GOING TO WATCH IT THEY WOULD HAVE ALREADY!!!! Anyway - eventually he did phrase it as "Something made them switch at 10 pm." Of course - that is somehow Bayley's fault (and solely Bayley's) But if there normally isn't that significant of a drop in teenage girls, doesn't it say something? He probably wouldn't have brought it up unless it was something unusual. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts