This week's ratings...

[Xero]

From PWInsider:

Raw 3.7

Impact 0.8

Update (also from PWInsider):

As mentioned earlier, the 3/15 edition of Raw did a 3.7 rating. The show averaged 5.6 million viewers. The show did hours of 3.73 and 3.68.

The 3/15 edition of Impact did a 0.84 rating, with 1,068,000 viewers.

[Juan]

lol

[viO]

Ouch.

[screech]

Ouch

[viO]

Poor TNA, hopefully that's just a result of Austin guest hosting.

[Xero]

TNA Mark: IT'S OK! IT WAS TAPED! THEY WERE AGAINST AUSTIN!

[screech]

Damn you, viO

[viO]

I'm not a fanboy of either promotion, but I want TNA to succeed for the sake of the business, to make things interesting again.

They've gotta be discouraged by this, 'tis a shame.

[Xero]

I want TNA to succeed, not to act like the chihuahua who thinks he's bigger than and can take on the car crushing machine.

[Gertner]

Bahahahahaha!

[The Franchise]

rofl TNA

[The Franchise]

Dixie Carter "Stunned"

[screech]

lol Franchise

[viO]

I'm sure everyone expected Impact's rating to drop this week anyway. I don't usually watch WWE and even I tuned in for Austin.

[Xero]

I'm sure everyone expected Impact's rating to drop this week anyway. I don't usually watch WWE and even I tuned in for Austin.

Gee, that sounds like a great excuse.

"No, Spike Executive, we KNEW the ratings would drop this week, the second week of our run!"

[viO]

ya

[The Franchise]

This week doesn't count they had Austin! Next week is the RAW before Mania so that doesn't count! Two weeks from now is the RAW after Mania, so that doesn't count either! Then it's the draft so that doesn't count! Etc etc...

[Xero]

I think Spike will catch onto their scam the night after Mania.

[Splaya]

Always going to be an excuse, never going to be the truth.

Gonna laugh when Raw's rating next week with Pete Rose is going to be like 3.5 and Impact with Hogan/Bischoff and company grab a 0.6 rating next week

[Nicky Fives]

lol... not surprising..... Austin = money.... smarks, marks, kiddies, women, men it doesn't matter.....

[Innovator]

There's always been an excuse with TNA

We don't have a good cable network

We don't have primetime

We don't have a big star

We don't have Hogan

We don't have Monday Night

Honestly, when are they gonna look in the mirror?

[TheAdamEvansFan]

It's because TNA was TAPED last night.

[viO]

I'm not gonna say they're gonna break 1.0-1.2 next week, but c'mon, taped + going against Austin, they can get a pass this week in my book. We'll see if there's a difference with them being live next week and not going against the biggest star in the history of wrestling. If their rating continues to drop, then they have no excuse.

[Ruien]

Okay, just want to throw some facts out here about how this is helping wrestling.

Before TNA moved to Mondays, Raw was doing 3.2 to a 3.5. Of course they will get a little boost heading into WrestleMania, so 3.7 is normal. This 1.0 and .8 are just extra people watching wrestling. Lets be happy more people are getting into the product again, the word will slowly spread at schools/work/etc etc and MAYBE just maybe become something big again.

[Xero]

Next week is the week before Mania. Of course there's an excuse.

Not a GOOD one, but it's the one they will (not would) use.

[Xero]

Okay, just want to throw some facts out here about how this is helping wrestling.

Before TNA moved to Mondays, Raw was doing 3.2 to a 3.5. Of course they will get a little boost heading into WrestleMania, so 3.7 is normal. This 1.0 and .8 are just extra people watching wrestling. Lets be happy more people are getting into the product again, the word will slowly spread at schools/work/etc etc and MAYBE just maybe become something big again.

How do we know more people are watching? How do we know that the large majority of TNA fans just don't watch RAW? If that's the case, there's nothing really added.

[PullMyFinger]

I don't see how anyone would even be surprised with this rating. I actually feared TNA would score a .5. Considering they did a 1.0 last week, it was obvious they would do lower because last night WWE had Stone Cold, they had the better show, TNA wasn't live, etc.

Anyone who thought they would even score a 1.0 or above is delusional.

Anyhow, eventually they'll grow. Probably won't get to 2.0 or 3.0, but in a few months I'm pretty sure they'll consistantly score 1.2-1.5.

To say that this is a war though is giving TNA too much credit. Not even close.

[The Franchise]

Even without Austin, it would have been like 3.5 vs 1.0

[Supreme Olajuwon]

You know the whole problem with this is all this talk is about what happens on Raw. And TNA is probably thinking the same way. The ratings depend on what's happening in WWE as if what happens on Impact doesn't matter. If TNA thinks that their ratings depend on what's going on over on Raw, then they have no chance of even staying on air, let alone competing. That type of thinking doesn't breed success.

[The Show Off]

Their is a diffrence between a reason and an excuse.

TNA jumped the gun in going to Monday nights and will continue to take a beating in the rating "war."

They have a lot of problems... a lot of problems. But so does the WWE. WWE got 3.7 based on reputation, not how go their shows have been latley. TNA got a 0.8 because of how bad most people thought their show was last week and because of WWE's brand recognition.

TNA isn't going up against WWE, they're going up against the name brand WWE. WWE's victory is only because of Austin and the fact that their established not because they're a "better show."

TNA's show last week was better. WWE's show last week was better.

I'm a Wrestling fan not a ratings fan. To me the "War" is 1 to 1 right now.

However, the ratings will be (whatever) to 0 until TNA pulls it together.

[NoRoolz]

Jesus, TNA's only just started it's drive give them a fucking chance.

Forget the bollocks, it WAS taped, this IS WWE's time of the year and they did have Austin and TNA has been real mainstream about 2 months.

To be honest I have little interest in either show and for me personally TNA has gotten boring for me. But some of you are so quick to be like "LOL TNA!" for looking inferior when surely as a wrestling fan you should want them to succeed? And so quick to laugh at TNA supporters and mimmicking excuses that, at this stage, are very fucking valid.

Fucking wrestling fans.

[NoRoolz]

I'm a Wrestling fan not a ratings fan.

I feel some of you need to read this again.

[erickman]

when is the wwe going to brake 4.0 again they had stone cold bret vs vince signing 2 weeks before wrestlemaina. is 3.9 the best wrestling can get now

[Xero]

WWE breaks 4 every few months.

[KayfabeMan]

Ratings mean nothing right now.

As long as Spike is behind TNA, and they are fine with them developing a brand name - then everyone should get the idea that 'WWE is beating TNA' out of their heads. WWE has been around for decades, while TNA is going on 8 years.

To think they have even come this far in 8 years WITHOUT the advantages WCW had in that time frame, is just amazing and needs to applauded right there. TNA did the whole, 'we're coming for you, WWE' thing - because believe it or not, that's what a lot of people want to hear. They ARE tired of WWE, their programming, and them being the only option; so TNA made a statement to help bring in that group of fans. Now TNA needs to drop that idea, and move forward.

People also need to realize that this company (TNA) does a lot without any promotion. I have seen 0 mainstream advertising by TNA. Yes, their fault. However, it's pretty impressive to draw their numbers off the gun vs. WWE, especially when wrestling itself isn't as popular as it once was.

For the last 4 years, TNA has been drawing .9 or 1.whatever for iMPACT. ECW, with the promotion of WWE, has drawn roughly the same in 2009. For TNA to go to Mondays and take their audience number with them, against RAW, is a good deal. That leaves room to build upon. They have MANY flaws, and MANY challenges - but that can be said of any company.

[VSG]

I want TNA to succeed, not to act like the chihuahua who thinks he's bigger than and can take on the car crushing machine.

Couldnt agree more! Oh well even Ryan Clark predicted a 0.8-0.9 for TNA so its not a great shock to anyone.. I did smack my lips in delight after seeing those numbers, I admit :naughty:

[ClockShot]

So what was the high point for TNA last night? I think most in the Raw thread jumped over when the Beautiful People came on. But that was about it.

[dronepool]

So do you guys think that TNA will stop taping every other week or has that been the "catch" in the company so the week is less hefty for the wrestlers?

[TheAdamEvansFan]

TNA... ISN'T DOING WHAT WCW DID.. THEY AIRED AT 8 PM EST 7 CT... They need to do that as Wrestling Fans are hungry for wrestling at this time. At this time, chick flixs are coming on, and the wrestling demographic is switching through the channels to find an hour long show before Raw or Impact. If they move an hour forward, they will increase their viewers immensely and can thus eventually move to an 3 hour show.. Running head to head with WWE is just plain stupid... Even WCW didn't do that.

[Xero]

TNA... ISN'T DOING WHAT WCW DID.. THEY AIRED AT 8 PM EST 7 CT... They need to do that as Wrestling Fans are hungry for wrestling at this time. At this time, chick flixs are coming on, and the wrestling demographic is switching through the channels to find an hour long show before Raw or Impact. If they move an hour forward, they will increase their viewers immensely and can thus eventually move to an 3 hour show.. Running head to head with WWE is just plain stupid... Even WCW didn't do that.

It's not only that, Bischoff had control of TNT. He said when they went to commercial and at times would control the flow that way. Without that control TNA loses a lot of ground.

[KayfabeMan]

So do you guys think that TNA will stop taping every other week or has that been the "catch" in the company so the week is less hefty for the wrestlers?

It's all just to save money.

It's extremely costly to go live every Monday, especially at this stage in the game for TNA. I have heard that down the road, if things work out, TNA will indeed go live every Monday night.

Right now, it's just the cost of going live - and the fact that they are based in Orlando, so they have to fly talents back to Orlando, etc. too every single Monday then. This way, they are in Orlando for Monday and Tuesday to go live and then tape; and it's cheaper, obviously.

[McLegend]

Ratings mean nothing right now.

As long as Spike is behind TNA, and they are fine with them developing a brand name - then everyone should get the idea that 'WWE is beating TNA' out of their heads. WWE has been around for decades, while TNA is going on 8 years.

To think they have even come this far in 8 years WITHOUT the advantages WCW had in that time frame, is just amazing and needs to applauded right there. TNA did the whole, 'we're coming for you, WWE' thing - because believe it or not, that's what a lot of people want to hear. They ARE tired of WWE, their programming, and them being the only option; so TNA made a statement to help bring in that group of fans. Now TNA needs to drop that idea, and move forward.

People also need to realize that this company (TNA) does a lot without any promotion. I have seen 0 mainstream advertising by TNA. Yes, their fault. However, it's pretty impressive to draw their numbers off the gun vs. WWE, especially when wrestling itself isn't as popular as it once was.

For the last 4 years, TNA has been drawing .9 or 1.whatever for iMPACT. ECW, with the promotion of WWE, has drawn roughly the same in 2009. For TNA to go to Mondays and take their audience number with them, against RAW, is a good deal. That leaves room to build upon. They have MANY flaws, and MANY challenges - but that can be said of any company.
So commericals for Impact during Raw don't count as mainstream. What's more mainstream for a wrestling audience?

C'mon Kayfabeman When TNA has to they do a lot of promotions. Remember when Kurt Angle came to TNA there were promotions everywhere, and on every major Radio station around the country.

Lack of promotion isn't the problem.

Also I still say PPV buys are the most important thing... So I'll wait and see before I pass full judgement.

[FearedSanctity]

So commericals for Impact during Raw don't count as mainstream. What's more mainstream for a wrestling audience?

TNA's commercials during RAW have mostly been market specific, they run them in areas they have an upcoming show in. They haven't had a commercial air in every market during RAW since the penny PPV, I believe.

[Xero]

TNA has had multiple spots on ESPN, too.

Maybe a lack of promotion but it's certainly not non-existent.

[McLegend]

TNA's commercials during RAW have mostly been market specific, they run them in areas they have an upcoming show in. They haven't had a commercial air in every market during RAW since the penny PPV, I believe.

Fair enough, but don't try and sell me they haven't done any promoting for it.

That's not true.

[Xero]

TNA has promoted themselves more in the past few months than they ever have. You'd think they could do a bit better.

They have Times Square billboards FFS.

[FearedSanctity]

Oh there's no doubting they've promoted, but I think it's clear they haven't done all they could.

The amount of promotion they did for the Hogan signing should be exceeded by promotion for a move to Monday nights. It's not even close. Sure there was more general interest in Hogan, but if anything they should've just made him the one to do it. Instead he made only a couple appearances, some of those being on places who's audience would've already known about the move.

[Loose Cannon]

I'm not going to really judge TNA and the TV ratings they are getting after 2 shows. I'll give them a few months to see what they can prove. I don't think going up against Raw @ 9-11 was a bad move, I do think they timed it all wrong though with Mania coming up.


I was interested to find out Monday Nitro's numbers when they first started up. credit goes to Wrestling Information Archive

September 4, 1995 2.5
September 11, 1995 2.4
September 18, 1995 1.9
September 25, 1995 2.7
October 2, 1995 2.5
October 9, 1995 2.6
October 16, 1995 2.2
October 23, 1995 2.6
October 30, 1995 2.3
November 6, 1995 2.0
November 13, 1995 2.0
November 20, 1995 2.5
November 27, 1995 2.5
December 4, 1995 2.4
December 11, 1995 2.6
December 18, 1995 2.7
December 25, 1995 2.5

[jskinnyg]

Surely they expected that after the egg they laid last night... Ouch is right!

[Xero]

From Dixie's Twitter: Although its classic David v Goliath, 1 stone will not bring down our giant, its a different day. It'll take time & commitment, we have both

She's clearly saying they're disappointed in the rating.

[TheAdamEvansFan]

True, but SPIKE is really invested and in tune with Bischoff and the new revamping of TNA.. The Spike Executives are responsible for some of the big signings as of late. So a move to 8 pm est 7 ct can be done and it NEEDS to be done so WWE fans can get into the first hour of TNA and get interested in their storylines.. BUT.. it must be LIVE or we can read it on here beforehand and ruin the surprise.. and I know some dipshit is going to say then don't read it on here, but seriously, real wrestling fans will read it on here cuz they are on edge!

[KayfabeMan]

TNA's commercials during RAW have mostly been market specific, they run them in areas they have an upcoming show in. They haven't had a commercial air in every market during RAW since the penny PPV, I believe.



Yeah, it's definitely not in my market, or in the markets of a lot of people I speak with regularly; as they haven't seen any promotion of TNA - and asked why TNA hasn't put a commercial on during RAW.

[KayfabeMan]

Oh there's no doubting they've promoted, but I think it's clear they haven't done all they could.

The amount of promotion they did for the Hogan signing should be exceeded by promotion for a move to Monday nights. It's not even close.


Absolutely. That was my point.

Hogan should've been the face, like you mentioned, for TNA's move to Monday nights - and again - like you, said - he appeared a lot of places where people likely already new TNA was on Mondays now.

There should have been more promotion to the general public in higher profile ways, instead of just wrestling or WWE fans.

[Kane Knight]

TNA isn't going up against WWE, they're going up against the name brand WWE. WWE's victory is only because of Austin and the fact that their established not because they're a "better show."

Except they'll always be doing that.

when is the wwe going to brake 4.0 again they had stone cold bret vs vince signing 2 weeks before wrestlemaina. is 3.9 the best wrestling can get now

What's interesting here is 5.6 million fans is about what they normally get on a 3.2 rating or so.

As long as Spike is behind TNA, and they are fine with them developing a brand name - then everyone should get the idea that 'WWE is beating TNA' out of their heads.

That's part of why ratings do matter. TNA has to make itself worth its time when they could be putting other programming in prime time. Their primary competition isn't even WWE right now, it's whatever they'd put in that slot.

TNA hasn't even entered into the ratings wars, really. TNA needs to establish that they will be worth keeping on Mondays. Spike May be fine with them not starting out well, but the question is how long they'll go with wrestling on Monday Night when the ratings aren't really better than the ones they got on Thursday.

Fans jumped the gun on the Monday Night Wars. That's why we have not only these comparison threads, but also the apologetics going on here. Though I'm sure some people would apologise for TNA period.

I'd be surprised if Spike was out and out disappointed with the ratings, but I'm sure they're paying attention. Probably moreso than USA, WWE, and so on.

[jskinnyg]

From Dixie's Twitter: Although its classic David v Goliath, 1 stone will not bring down our giant, its a different day. It'll take time & commitment, we have both

She's clearly saying they're disappointed in the rating.

You are right on here Xero... She is clearly disappointed and clearly out of her head if the think they are going to take down the "Giant"...

[RGWhat316]

I agree with many saying that TNA should start at 8 if they want to fight WWE. The timing continued to be a problem during the show itself. I was at a friend's house last night, and we had picture-in-picture going, and too many times, both would be in commercials at the same time!

With Austin hosting, TNA really had no chance. Though I definitely do not want them to fail as WWE needs competition.

[Indifferent Clox]

They know their ratings will suck before mania, then after mania wwe will go down and they will go up, thus 'proving' the ratings are increasing.

[Juan]

(Quotes transcribed by TheSun.co.uk)

WWE Hall of Famer "Stone Cold" Steve Austin appeared on Hardcore Sports Radio this week and discussed TNA Wrestling challenging WWE on Monday nights. Despite the fact that Austin is aWWE guy through and through, he says "competition is great for the business" and hopes TNA can give WWE a run for its money.

"I wish the TNA people all the luck in the world because it means more of the boys have jobs and it gives fans an alternative" Austin said.

TNA has a lot of the WCW pieces in place (Hogan, Bischoff, Flair, Sting, The Band), but Austin doesn't know if TNA will ever be able to reach WCW's popularity peak. "I don't know if we'll ever re-create that Nitro-Raw war," he said."WCW kicked our ass for two years, then we smoked their ass and never looked back and put them out of business."

Even though he wishes good luck for TNA, he knows it will be close to impossible for them to realistically push them to the brink like WCW did. "I don't think anyone will ever come close to really giving true competition to WWE because they're so far ahead of the game, they're rooted in their system, and they're a winner."

[Emperor Smeat]

The show being taped defiantly hurt TNA this week and it didn't help the return of Stone Cold on RAW combined with RAW doing Wrestlemania rematches generated the huge gap between the 2 shows. The way spoilers came out for TNA made it seem like half the show was interesting and the other half made no sense in either results or promos.

Either way TNA needs to think long term since they still need to work on booking and less wasteful segments while realizing ratings can't rely on random surprises every week like they did the 1st two Mondays (test Monday and last week).

[Mr. JL]

UPDATED: RAW vs. iMPACT! Ratings (Loads Of Data)
By Ryan Clark on Tuesday, March 16th, 2010 at 9:20 PM EST


UPDATED REPORT:

WWE RAW did a 3.71 cable rating last night off hours of 3.68 and 3.73 and averaged 5.60 million viewers, an overall increase of 10% in viewership from last week. RAW’s first hour (which drew 5.57 million viewers) was the most viewed first hour since August 4th, 2009, while hour two (5.63 million viewers) was the most viewed second hour since the January 4th RAW.

TNA iMPACT! did a .84 cable rating off hours of .88 and .80 and averaged 1.1 million viewers, an overall decrease of 21.4% in viewership from last week. iMPACT! opened with a .84. In a very troubling sign for TNA, the AJ Styles vs. Jeff Hardy main event was the lowest rated segment of the entire show with a .72 with the overrun doing a .74. Keep in mind though that the match went head-to-head with a Bret Hart-Vince McMahon-Steve Austin contract signing on RAW.

OTHER NOTES:

– Monday’s TNA iMPACT! rating of .84 is the lowest rating for iMPACT! since November of 2006. Back then, Impact was airing in a late-night Thursday timeslot, not in prime-time.

– Not a single quarter hour segment of iMPACT! reached the 1.0 mark. The highest rated segment was the fourth quarter hour (9:45PM ET-10PM ET) which featured the Beautiful People, Hulk Hogan calling out Sting, and RVD appearing. The segment drew a .96. It’s probably worth noting that the Beautiful People were also in one of the highest rated segments of iMPACT! last week.

– After the .96 in the fourth quarter hour, every segment dropped in the ratings all the way up to AJ Styles vs. Jeff Hardy doing a show-low .72. The overrun saw a slight increase up to a .74.

– TNA lost 15% of the audience they opened with, going from a .87 opening quarter hour to a .74 for the overrun.

As noted earlier, SpikeTV and TNA were aware that this week’s rating would be down due to Austin’s WWE return. This number hasn’t come as a shock to them.

ORIGINAL REPORT:

WWE RAW scored a 3.7 cable rating.

TNA iMPACT! scored a 0.8 cable rating.
-----

[Volare]

*bomb whistle*

[Afterlife]

Maybe main eventing the guy who's going to jail for a few years isn't that appealing.

[FearedSanctity]

3 things, IMO, TNA needs to do:

1. PROMOTE. Just because the move is done doesn't mean they should stop. I wonder what percentage of RAW viewers even know about TNA? Up that and more people will at least switch back and forth. Then find ways to the general public.

2. They need to be live every week. Taped shows hurt, ALWAYS. The typical person who watches TNA is also the kind of person to read spoilers to see if a show sucks. If it's live, shit show or not, they'll have to watch to find out.

3. The only part of RAW they need to be competing with is the first hour. This way TNA's main event will go against an always weak mid-RAW. This is a no-brainer. They'd have momentum as RAW starts, and will lose people for RAW's open, but if the show's decent enough they'll switch back, seeing as how after the open is when the Diva and squash matches usually come.

[Mr. JL]

Yeah, I hope Jeff has a good lawyer. For his sake.



TNA needs to stop making excuses.
TNA needs to stop expecting bad ratings.
And produce a wrestling show that gets fans to tune in.

I know it's early, and they have just begun and blah, blah, blah.

At some point they are going to need consistent results to justify the incredible amount of money they must be spending or TNA is going to be property of the WWE.

[RKO'em]

It all relies on booking. TNA needs to stop cluttering shit and make feuds mean something.

[RKO'em]

Even though WWE will still ruin them.

[The Mackem]

I guess it's better that they blame going to head to head with Austin than listening to some of the verterans blaming the up and coming talent. At least TNA isn't like WCW in that respect.

[DaVe]

Bah gawd what a war! WHAT A WAR! The WWE is in a fight for its life here!

[Mr. Nerfect]

Ratings mean nothing right now.

As long as Spike is behind TNA, and they are fine with them developing a brand name - then everyone should get the idea that 'WWE is beating TNA' out of their heads. WWE has been around for decades, while TNA is going on 8 years.

To think they have even come this far in 8 years WITHOUT the advantages WCW had in that time frame, is just amazing and needs to applauded right there. TNA did the whole, 'we're coming for you, WWE' thing - because believe it or not, that's what a lot of people want to hear. They ARE tired of WWE, their programming, and them being the only option; so TNA made a statement to help bring in that group of fans. Now TNA needs to drop that idea, and move forward.

People also need to realize that this company (TNA) does a lot without any promotion. I have seen 0 mainstream advertising by TNA. Yes, their fault. However, it's pretty impressive to draw their numbers off the gun vs. WWE, especially when wrestling itself isn't as popular as it once was.

For the last 4 years, TNA has been drawing .9 or 1.whatever for iMPACT. ECW, with the promotion of WWE, has drawn roughly the same in 2009. For TNA to go to Mondays and take their audience number with them, against RAW, is a good deal. That leaves room to build upon. They have MANY flaws, and MANY challenges - but that can be said of any company.

I somewhat agree with this. Did anyone really expect TNA to suddenly get big ratings against the WWE heading into WrestleMania right way? Ideally, a better rating would be good, but let's give them time to start a trend. If the ratings keep dropping and dropping, then sure -- it's a bad move. But if they stay fairly consistent and even increase, then it might be worth it.

Mondays are traditionally harder to score a higher rating with than Thursdays, are they not? Logically, a smaller rating would be expected. Let's just see how the ratings match up over a period of time. There are so many factors that go into this (what's happening in the WWE, what's happening in TNA, what else is on that week, etc.).

If TNA succeed -- more power to them. If they fail, then that's interesting in a morbid sort of way, too. The WWE will at least pick up some more signees, and ROH will have some of its guys back.

[Kane Knight]

Their primary competition isn't even WWE right now, it's whatever they'd put in that slot.

Case in point: While it's on USA, last week reruns of NCIS had four of the top ten slots in the Cable rankings. They were all near the bottom, but they were pulling in 2.7 ratings plus. They also pulled nearly four times the ratings TNA did.

If the dirt sheets are right and the Impact! replay got the same rankings as the live show, there's little point, especially when they could slap something else in there. Maybe not NCIS (Especially since it's already on USA), but if other syndicated shows would do better, it's less of a gamble for more reward.

Admittedly, this is playing a little fast and loose for simplicity's sake.

[The Mackem]

One thing for sure is that if they don't regain that 'lost' 20% of their viewers each and 15% over the course of the show, they won't retain their place in the scheduling. Maybe Austin was a factor but, if next weeks figures are the same or lower, there's nowhere really for TNA to hide. If Spike and TNA realised that things would start well on debut, decrease for the run in to Wrestlemania and not improve significantly until post Wrestlemania has died down, then fair enough. Just seeems rather odd.

If what I read lately is correct when Impact has been on a Monday night:

TNA
January special: 1.5 - 2.2million viewers
last week: 1.0 - 1.4 million viewers
this week: 0.84 - 1.1million viewers

Raw:
Impact Janaury special - 3.4 - 5.6 million
last week 3.4 - 5.1 million
this week 3.71 - 5.6 million

[SOCCER LEGS]

a few things that i think that TNA needs to do if they want to have a shot at competing with WWE:

1) trim the fat - they have a roster that is so bloated with all sorts talent there is no way to properly utilize all of it. they need to get rid of what isn't going to DRAW VIEWERs, and promote their top talent (Angle and Styles).

2) raise production values - their show looks like shit compared to RAW. not one single memorable theme music, lousy camera work etc. makes the show considerably less fun to watch.

3) get rid of mike tennay, put eric bischoff on announce team. bischoff is a great announcer, great heel and perfect compliment to tazz.

4) cut down the number of PPVs a year. WWE has 3 shows to promote their 14 or however many PPVs they have per year. TNA only has one, and should only be doing 4 or 5 PPVs a year.

5) stop putting jeff jarrett on TV. nobody cared about him in WWE/WCW, and nobody cares about him now.

6) keep all the has beens in management roles. flair vs. hogan was the most pathetic thing i've ever seen in my life. the fact that they would try that is just a slap in the face to both of them. never again please. it's worth it to have them around to help push the younger talent but for god sakes keep them out of the ring.

[KayfabeMan]

Jeff Jarrett is a great hand in the ring.

He shouldn't be pulled off TV, but rather utilized correctly.

We can see that Bischoff will pull a 'swerve' on the Hulkster, and that more than likely Hall and Nash will join Bischoff to help push out Hogan. Furthermore, more than likely it will wind up being Hogan joining those guys again at some point in another swerve against TNA.

Jarrett should be the main star rising up with the support of 'HIS' company to defend that TNA brand and conquer the outside guys. This is a proper utilization, not working him in angles with Foley and jobbing him left and right.

[Damian Rey]

1) trim the fat - they have a roster that is so bloated with all sorts talent there is no way to properly utilize all of it. they need to get rid of what isn't going to DRAW VIEWERs, and promote their top talent (Angle and Styles).

Agreed completely. The only thing is they have to be careful as to who they cut. They still need recognizeable names that have established success. So yes, Angle should stay, even Anderson. Hall and Waltman, Nasty Boys, and even the Dudleys should be let go of. Jeff Hardyand Shannon Moore are also waisting roster space.

2) raise production values - their show looks like shit compared to RAW. not one single memorable theme music, lousy camera work etc. makes the show considerably less fun to watch.

That would cost a lot of money. TNA is just now starting to turn a profit, and they're now going head-to-head with the competition. Not to mention all the roster additions doesn't help the budget either. They're production is fine. What they need to do is start charging for event entry so that they can actually get people who want to watch wrestling in their and not their dumb smark fans everywhere

3) get rid of mike tennay, put eric bischoff on announce team. bischoff is a great announcer, great heel and perfect compliment to tazz.

Bisch is better utilized in his current role. He's been an authority figure for far too long and movin him to the booth would seem odd. Tenay is okay. He needs to learn how to call the actual match though. He's trying to be their "JR" too much, instead of playing his strength and actually calling the wrestling side of things

4) cut down the number of PPVs a year. WWE has 3 shows to promote their 14 or however many PPVs they have per year. TNA only has one, and should only be doing 4 or 5 PPVs a year.
:y:
5) stop putting jeff jarrett on TV. nobody cared about him in WWE/WCW, and nobody cares about him now.
Jarret is as good in the ring now as he has been in years. he more than serves a purpose. He just needs to be utilized better. As an upper mid card guy putting over young talent with solid matches and an occasional title chase, Jarret would be more than serviceable


6) keep all the has beens in management roles. flair vs. hogan was the most pathetic thing i've ever seen in my life. the fact that they would try that is just a slap in the face to both of them. never again please. it's worth it to have them around to help push the younger talent but for god sakes keep them out of the ring.
:y:

[Mr Amazing]

TNA's ratings will go up after wrestlemania

[The Pope]

TNA's ratings will go up after wrestlemania

[Juan]

TNA's ratings will go up after wrestlemania

Can you give me tomorrow's lottery numbers too while you're at it?

[Swiss Ultimate]

TNA had over a million viewers?

I wonder what the demographics are...

[FearedSanctity]

Raw:
Impact Janaury special - 3.4 - 5.6 million
last week 3.4 - 5.1 million
this week 3.71 - 5.6 million

wtf is this? Why in the hell does it vary? :wtf:

[Mr. JL]

wtf is this? Why in the hell does it vary? :wtf:

iMPACT! was on peoples televisions, but the people were sitting on the toilet not watching. :shifty:

[DaVe]

Rating = percentage of total households tuned in to show. There is no rule as to how many people have to watch per household. Share = like rating, but percentage of total tvs turned on, tuned in to show.

(IIRC)

[The Mackem]

wtf is this? Why in the hell does it vary? :wtf:

I'm not from America but from what I've learned from reading Kane Knight's posts is that the rating is a share of the viewing total, so if you have differing total amounts of overal viewiers each week the same 'rating' can equate to different viewers in seperate weeks.

[FearedSanctity]

I see, makes sense that way then. So basically people have been investing way too much into the rating itself, when what matters is the total viewers, since that's constant regardless

[DaVe]

Mackem is getting two things mixed up... the rating and share are completely different. But obviously closely related.

An increase in ratings means you're getting more households to tune in. An increase in viewership does not mean that necessary.

[The Mackem]

I try my best but in the UK we don't get as complicated with TV ratings, tends to be just viewing figures. So the viewers and ratings are being reported but not the share, I wonder why that is? Guess it's not really as important?

[FearedSanctity]

Viewership totals should be the number more watched though, IMO, as it's constant. 1mil viewers stays 1mil viewers. But with the rating a 1.0 could theoretically be 1.1mil one week and 800,000 the next. Makes no sense to put so much stock in a number that can fluctuate like that.

I understand it's meaning because of it being a percentage that tuned in, but when your total viewers stays the same or even goes up slightly, who gives a fuck if the rating number is lower?

[Kane Knight]

wtf is this? Why in the hell does it vary? :wtf:

Because the ratings are a percentage of viewers. different total populations watch from week to week, and even from day to day. There's no direct correlation between the rating and the number of viewers, though you can generally ballpark it based on day, time of day, and so on.

So one number says "out of the number of people watching, X% was watching this show." Number says how many millions that was.

Both are useful tools for businesses involved, so they're usually both represented.

[Xero]

From PWInsider:

Thanks to Marty Hotts for the following. ... Bischoff was asked this question on his Facebook page: Why aren't you commenting on your thoughts on this week's ratings. They weren't better but I think everyone would like to hear what you think.

Bischoff replied with: Markus...you need to get a life.

lol

[DaVe]

haha pretty weak response by bish

[thecc]

From PWInsider:

Thanks to Marty Hotts for the following. ... Bischoff was asked this question on his Facebook page: Why aren't you commenting on your thoughts on this week's ratings. They weren't better but I think everyone would like to hear what you think.

Bischoff replied with: Markus...you need to get a life.

lolhttp://www.neogaf.com/~kurai/umad.jpg

[Xero]

From PWInsider:

Originally, TNA was not going to air a replay last night. Much like last week, it's a good thing that they did. After coming within .01 of a point last week, the 3/18 replay did a 0.84 rating, exactly what it did on Monday night. The show did 1,162,000 viewers. It seems pretty obvious that keeping the replay around is a good idea.

The 3/18 edition of Superstars did a 0.89 rating, with 974,000 viewers.

The replay did a 0.16 rating, with 143,000 viewers.

[6-String King]

This past Impact was fucking boring. I don't know what happened but they need to go back to the original formula. Maybe they need to go live every week.