Single Ratings thread

[Kane Knight]

Because i feel like it.

Raw ratings for the week of 4-14-08:
2.8 with 4.7 million viewers
2.7 with 4.4 million viewers.

Raw ratings for the week of 4-21-08:
2.9 with 5.1 million viewers
2.8 with 4.8 million viewers.

Raw ratings for the week of 4-28-08:

2.9 with 4.9 million viewers
2.7 with 4.4 million viewers.

Raw ratings for the week of 5-05-08:
2.8 with 4.7 million viewers
2.6 with 4.6 million viewers.

Raw ratings for the week of 5-12-08:
2.9 with 4.7 million viewers
2.7 with 4.3 million viewers.

Raw Ratings for the week of 5-19-08:
Nielsen Media did not update.

Raw Ratings for the week of 5-27-08:
WWE Monday Night Raw failed to rank in the top ten. The lowest score was 2.7. However, there were several playoffs games this week, and I don't know if any of them were on Monday night.

Raw Ratings for the week of 6-2-08:
2.7 with 4.73 million viewers.
The other hour failed to place.

I'm just going to keep updating a single thread. Don't know if anyone else cares, but this is something I do find interesting.

[Dorkchop]

I think you're the only person on TPWW who has a big interest in ratings. What is it about the ratings that interests you? I know some people who are big on statistics and numbers... but they usually apply that interest in sports.

Without you posting ratings, I wouldn't know that WWE's pulling in the same ratings WCW was when they were going out of business. Thanks, Kane Knight:y:

[Outsider]

Ratings interest me.

Ratings affect how much money the WWE will be able to make in advertising as well as how much the network is able to do the same. If advertisment revenue starts slipping the network will start putting pressure on Vince to do something about it. Plus if the WWE starts hemoraging money (which I can't believe they are not doing sometimes) then stock value will be affected.

The value of WWE stock is probably more important than ratings, but rating affect stock more than stock affects ratings.

[Innovator]

I'm interested in ratings, but KK gets his ratings from somewhere different than PWInsider and the Observer

[Xero]

I recently heard Scherer mention that he gets the ratings directly from WWE, KK gets them from Nielson.

[Innovator]

Doesn't matter what they are, it's all shitty right now

[Outsider]

Can there not be both posted?

[Innovator]

Well last night's 3 hour RAW, according to PWInsider, got a 3.0...yup

Hour one got a 2.4

Hour two got a 3.26

Hour three got a 3.43

When it dropped below 3, heads rolled and Vince came back onto TV, so take it for what it's worth

[redoneja]

Raw's first hour was the top show on cable according to Nielsen. Although, that's still like winning the Gold Medal in the Special Olympics, considering the numbers they did.

[redoneja]

^ That's for the week of 4-14-08. Not the 3 hour special.

[The Genius]

so what were raw ratings like during the peak of the competitive monday night wars?

[Xero]

I think combined they'd hit somewhere between 8 and 10 on average.

[IC Champion]

I remember when WWE was doing 7.0's and shit

[DaVe]

Instant Classic is pretty close - 6s and 7s during 1999 and 2000 for RAW. Their highest ever was 8.1 for May 10, 1999. I think Nitro wasn't on that night, though. Ridiculously amazing when just the year earlier until sometime after Wrestlemania 14, RAW max was 4 and averaged in the low to mid 3s.

The second greatest website in the history of our sport: http://www.100megsfree4.com/wiawrestling/pages/wwf/wwfraw.htm

[Kane Knight]

I'm interested in ratings, but KK gets his ratings from somewhere different than PWInsider and the Observer

Yeah, from the people who actually do the ratings, Nielsen Media Research.

Nielsen is the most accurate system in terms of ratings. They're not perfect, and they certainly don't account for everything (Nielsen Soundscan is even worse), but Nielsen's TV ratings are what WWE and the dirt sheets claim to deal with.

I recently heard Scherer mention that he gets the ratings directly from WWE, KK gets them from Nielson.

Word. And they always print a prettier picture.

Raw's first hour was the top show on cable according to Nielsen. Although, that's still like winning the Gold Medal in the Special Olympics, considering the numbers they did.

It was, in fact. But then, when you consider it's not because Raw ratings are up, but because the other shows are down, it's even more like the Special Olympics.

[Afterlife]

Hey, I say claim a victory whenever you can. lol Until Vinnie retires, there will be no magic increase in viewership.

[Londoner]

Good idea for a thread, i reckon those ratings justify how shit its been.

[NoRoolz]

Yeah, should be stickied or something.

Will be interesting in a few months to be able to make graphs and stuff and compare from last year, year before that and from like the attitude era.

Not everyone cares about ratings, but enough people do that this thread should be good once it gets going.

[Kane Knight]

Good idea for a thread, i reckon those ratings justify how shit its been.

The ratings generally are deserved.

Part of my interest in ratings is sort of the "train wreck" effect. Though ratings continue to dwindle, they've not made tangible efforts to change the product. I'm interested to see where exactly WWE's "rock bottom" is.

I mean, the primary reason the ratings system exists is as a marketing tool. That's why the in depth stuff requires you to pay. Ratings tell networks what makes them money, advertisers where to buy time, and the people who make the show how they're doing.

Not to mention, a couple years ago, it was a given that WWE was on top of the cable ratings. For that matter, remember how panicked WWE was when they had that show with a 2.7 rating? Now they're doing it as more than just a one time fluke.

[NoRoolz]

KK, do you know what the average ratings (more or less) for recent years, say from 2003- Now?

[Kane Knight]

I've got the NMR spreadhseets going back over the last 1.5 years, before that, only a vaguish recollection.

[NoRoolz]

OK, have ratings gone down (and how much if so) since you started the spreadsheets?

[NoRoolz]

... I feel like I'm interrogating you for some sort of crime.

[Kane Knight]

Oh yeah, quite a bit. Prior to my record keeping, they were doing in the low fours. Generally, 4.0 and 4.1 area, so REALLY low 4s. Then, for a while, the 3.7 area seemed like it was going to be the bottom level, because no matter how shitty the show was, it always got around 3.7. Then 3.4. Then 3.0. It's varied over the last couple of months due to the Mania hype (Which didn't do as much as it normally does), but they've done below 3.0 quite a bit over the lasy year. Not more often than not or anything, but enough that it should be alarming that there is such a trend.

I should probably compile the data I have and put it up in this thread for perusal.

[NoRoolz]

Yeah that'd be pretty good.

Surely Vince is concerned.

[Londoner]

I bet vince hasn't even noticed.

[Kane Knight]

Well, WWE's more profitable than ever before, so he may not be. Of course, the question as to whether WWE can sustain these profits is another one entirely.

After all, ticket sales and buyrates are down, but they are making more money because they're charging more per ass in seat. Surely, they don't think that increasing ticket prices as people are losing interest works as a longterm solution. Also, their DVD sales are up, but look at how fast they're cranking them out. Not only that, but big discs like the Steve Austin one seem to be helping there, and eventually, they will run out of big names from the past to leech off of, or at least ones the average fan will care about.

Vince is rolling in money, the stockholders don't care about ratings (and probably don't even care about buyrates as long as the dividends are good), so I'm sure there's no reason for Vince to sweat. After all, things like this must surely last forver, yes?

[Kane Knight]

I bet vince hasn't even noticed.

Vince surely noticed a couple of times, since it was major news and caused a panicked reaction from WWE. Whether he pays attention regularly is another story, and sincerely doubt he does.

[Kane Knight]

Raw ratings for the week of 4-21-08:
2.9 with 5.1 million viewers
2.8 with 4.8 million viewers.

Raw was at positions 3 and 4, being beat out only by the NFL draft (Which drew a smaller number of viewers, but a better share for that night) and The Suns/Spurs ion the Playoffs. Raw did only a couple of points better than episodes of House in syndication on USA (Though only one of those episodes was near the numbers Raw did, and that was only 4.1 million viewers).

[Londoner]

So basically, it still sucks.

[NoRoolz]

Do these ratings include those who record the show? DVR etc.

[Kane Knight]

Do these ratings include those who record the show? DVR etc.

They include people who record and watch the show within 24 hours.

[Kane Knight]

So basically, it still sucks.

I suppose it depends on how you slice "It sucks." I mean, WWE was sucking well before its ratings dropped down below the 4.0 range. Hell, with Cena on top and getting booed, they were at 3.7. Plus, I think it can be debated as to whether or not drawing nearly 5 million people a week is "sucking."

Thought probably it does count as sucking, since they used to draw nearly twice that. :D

[Afterlife]

Then again, most of the big name guys kinda split in the same general time. That may not necessarily be a contributing factor; I mean, it wasn't exactly a walk-out or anything. But the guys that built the era of high ratings are no longer active and only Foley is still really relative to the programming, in regards to the retired. HBM took quite awhile coming back, but now that he's here, like Jericho, they're not going to do very much in the way of top titles. Taker's getting old, Kane's getting fat...and then there's the entire "top tier" at Raw. The big dogs just ain't what they used to be.

Again, I'm looking at this simply as a showmanship angle, because that's how my mind works, so this could all just be fluff. But when your top feud is based on backstage nepotism, that's got to be a hang-up. Just because you like boring boring people, doesn't mean your audience does.

[Kane Knight]

Then again, most of the big name guys kinda split in the same general time. That may not necessarily be a contributing factor; I mean, it wasn't exactly a walk-out or anything. But the guys that built the era of high ratings are no longer active and only Foley is still really relative to the programming, in regards to the retired. HBM took quite awhile coming back, but now that he's here, like Jericho, they're not going to do very much in the way of top titles. Taker's getting old, Kane's getting fat...and then there's the entire "top tier" at Raw. The big dogs just ain't what they used to be.

Again, I'm looking at this simply as a showmanship angle, because that's how my mind works, so this could all just be fluff. But when your top feud is based on backstage nepotism, that's got to be a hang-up. Just because you like boring boring people, doesn't mean your audience does.

But as a point of fact, it took several years after all those big names left before ratings started to really feel it. I'm not going to pretend that there was no impact on ratings, but the ratings decreases post-the Rock (As an example) are nothing compared to the ratings decreases over the last couple of years.

Though you are definitely right that feuds based on nepotism and your own personal interests do not necessarily translate into ratings.

[Afterlife]

Well, as I've said on numerous occassions, I don't know jack about numbers. But it seems to me, the people chose Rock and Austin and Foley, to a degree, to be their stars. Sure, there were manufactured elements to every big name, but the people liked them back then. These days, there are the wrestlers you like, and then there are the guys the company puts on top, so why should you care? Hell, Christian, in my sincere opinion, would have been "The Next The Rock", because the crowd loved him. It just seems like once you forget to aknowledge the crowd -- the crowd upon which your company relies -- your company must expect a shift in viewer loyalty.

[Kane Knight]

Raw ratings for the week of 4-28-08:

2.9 with 4.9 million viewers
2.7 with 4.4 million viewers.

[KYR]

Vince surely noticed a couple of times, since it was major news and caused a panicked reaction from WWE. Whether he pays attention regularly is another story, and sincerely doubt he does.

If I were a shareholder in WWE, I would be extremely concerned if ratings were not seriously considered.

Ratings equal advertising dollars which in turn leads to profits and dividend returns.

Oh and keep this going KK. :y:

[Kane Knight]

Shareholders only seem to care about the money. Long as the stock prices are high, the revenues are high, and the divdends keep rolling in, they're fine. Which isn't completely wrong.

[Afterlife]

In all reality, as a shareholder, one only needs to be concerned with the profits. It doesn't concern you how the money is generated -- it's not your company. As long as things go your way, what's there to cause concern?

[Kane Knight]

In all reality, as a shareholder, one only needs to be concerned with the profits. It doesn't concern you how the money is generated -- it's not your company. As long as things go your way, what's there to cause concern?


There is a good argument for paying closer attention, as it means that you'll be savvy to changes in stock price. And if WWE's stock price ever ends up in jeopardy, it'll be very wise.

[Afterlife]

Yes, but it's not a necessity. Just an option.

[Kane Knight]

I'm agreeing with you.

In a roundabout way, mind.

[Afterlife]

Apology accepted. :p

[Kane Knight]

Raw ratings for the week of 5-05-08:
2.8 with 4.7 million viewers
2.6 with 4.6 million viewers.

[Kane Knight]

So...The week after Regal "pulled the plug," the top hour lost a point in the ratings and 200,000 viewers. I can't remember who asked the question of how it could affect ratings, but there's your answer....

(Disclaimer: I'm not saying that it did affect ratings, though it full well may have. I'm simply saying...Oh, fuck...If you can't figure it out with prompting....)

[Kane Knight]

Raw ratings for the week of 5-12-08:
2.9 with 4.7 million viewers
2.7 with 4.3 million viewers.

[addy2hotty]

UK ratings....

Raw down to 69,000 viewers for the prime time reshowing, the live showing doesn't even rate.

I can't imagine a majority of them get the PPV's.

Sky pay A LOT for the exclusive showings. Can't see them carrying on with that much longer with the shit loads they've paid for UK sports.

[Kane Knight]

Jesus Christ.

[Kane Knight]

I didn't forget about this project, but last week, NMR didn't update.

This week, Raw has failed to make last week's top ten.


Raw Ratings for the week of 5-27-08:
WWE Monday Night Raw failed to rank in the top ten. The lowest score was 2.7. However, there were several playoffs games this week, and I don't know if any of them were on Monday night.

[Innovator]

KK, you have the 5/19 numbers? The dirt sheet ones had them coming in at 2.9, wanted to know what the Nielsen one was

[Kane Knight]

Nah. They didn't have Data up. It was listed as the 12th until an hour or so ago.

[NoRoolz]

UK ratings....

Raw down to 69,000 viewers for the prime time reshowing, the live showing doesn't even rate.

I can't imagine a majority of them get the PPV's.

Sky pay A LOT for the exclusive showings. Can't see them carrying on with that much longer with the shit loads they've paid for UK sports.

Most people these days have Sky+, and just record the live showing. This must have a huge effect on the ratings, right?

[Kane Knight]

Most people these days have Sky+, and just record the live showing. This must have a huge effect on the ratings, right?You mean like DVR/PVR?

Over here, the ratings include any DVR recording played back within 24 hours.

[Savio]

<table border="1" bordercolor="#808080" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="" width="280"><tbody><tr><td> February 15, 1999
</td> <td> 5.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 22, 1999
</td> <td> 5.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 29, 1999
</td> <td> 6.3
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 8, 1999
</td> <td> 6.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 15, 1999
</td> <td> 5.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 22, 1999
</td> <td> 6.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 29, 1999
</td> <td> 6.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 5, 1999
</td> <td> 5.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 12, 1999
</td> <td> 6.3
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 19, 1999
</td> <td> 6.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 26, 1999
</td> <td> 6.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 3, 1999
</td> <td> 6.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 10, 1999
</td> <td> 8.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 17, 1999
</td> <td> 6.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 24, 1999
</td> <td> 7.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 7, 1999
</td> <td> 6.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 14, 1999
</td> <td> 6.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 21, 1999
</td> <td> 6.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 28, 1999
</td> <td> 6.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 5, 1999
</td> <td> 6.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 12, 1999
</td> <td> 6.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 19, 1999
</td> <td> 6.3
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 26, 1999
</td> <td> 7.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 2, 1999
</td> <td> 5.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 9, 1999
</td> <td> 6.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 16, 1999
</td> <td> 6.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 23, 1999
</td> <td> 5.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 30, 1999
</td> <td> 4.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 6, 1999
</td> <td> 4.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 13, 1999
</td> <td> 6.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 20, 1999
</td> <td> 6.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 27, 1999
</td> <td> 6.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 4, 1999
</td> <td> 5.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 11, 1999
</td> <td> 6.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 18, 1999
</td> <td> 5.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 25, 1999
</td> <td> 5.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 1, 1999
</td> <td> 5.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 8, 1999
</td> <td> 5.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 15, 1999
</td> <td> 6.3
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 22, 1999
</td> <td> 5.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 29, 1999
</td> <td> 6.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 6, 1999
</td> <td> 6.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 13, 1999
</td> <td> 6.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 20, 1999
</td> <td> 5.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 27, 1999
</td> <td> 5.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 3, 2000
</td> <td> 6.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 10, 2000
</td> <td> 6.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 17, 2000
</td> <td> 6.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 24, 2000
</td> <td> 6.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 31, 2000
</td> <td> 6.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 7, 2000
</td> <td> 6.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 14, 2000
</td> <td> 4.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 21, 2000
</td> <td> 5.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 28, 2000
</td> <td> 6.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 6, 2000
</td> <td> 6.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 13, 2000
</td> <td> 6.3
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 20, 2000
</td> <td> 6.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 27, 2000
</td> <td> 6.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 3, 2000
</td> <td> 6.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 10, 2000
</td> <td> 6.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 17, 2000
</td> <td> 6.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 24, 2000
</td> <td> 7.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 1, 2000
</td> <td> 7.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 8, 2000
</td> <td> 6.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 15, 2000
</td> <td> 6.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 22, 2000
</td> <td> 7.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 29, 2000
</td> <td> 6.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 5, 2000
</td> <td> 5.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 12, 2000
</td> <td> 6.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 19, 2000
</td> <td> 5.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 26, 2000
</td> <td> 6.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 3, 2000
</td> <td> 5.3
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 10, 2000
</td> <td> 6.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 17, 2000
</td> <td> 6.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 24, 2000
</td> <td> 6.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 31, 2000
</td> <td> 6.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 7, 2000
</td> <td> 6.3
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 14, 2000
</td> <td> 5.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 21, 2000
</td> <td> 6.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 28, 2000
</td> <td> 4.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 4, 2000
</td> <td> 4.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 11, 2000
</td> <td> 5.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 18, 2000
</td> <td> 5.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 25, 2000
</td> <td> 5.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 2, 2000
</td> <td> 5.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 9, 2000
</td> <td> 5.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 16, 2000
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 23, 2000
</td> <td> 5.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 30, 2000
</td> <td> 4.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 6, 2000
</td> <td> 5.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 13, 2000
</td> <td> 5.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 20, 2000
</td> <td> 5.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 27, 2000
</td> <td> 5.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 4, 2000
</td> <td> 5.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 11, 2000
</td> <td> 5.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 18, 2000
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 25, 2000
</td> <td> 3.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 1, 2001
</td> <td> 4.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 8, 2001
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 15, 2001
</td> <td> 5.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 22, 2001
</td> <td> 5.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 29, 2001
</td> <td> 5.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 5, 2001
</td> <td> 5.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 12, 2001
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 19, 2001
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 26, 2001
</td> <td> 5.1
</td></tr></tbody></table>

[Savio]

<table border="1" bordercolor="#808080" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="" width="280"><tbody><tr><td> March 5, 2001
</td> <td> 4.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 12, 2001
</td> <td> 4.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 19, 2001
</td> <td> 4.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 26, 2001
</td> <td> 4.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 2, 2001
</td> <td> 5.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 9, 2001
</td> <td> 5.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 16, 2001
</td> <td> 5.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 23, 2001
</td> <td> 5.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 30, 2001
</td> <td> 5.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 7, 2001
</td> <td> 4.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 14, 2001
</td> <td> 4.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 21, 2001
</td> <td> 4.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 28, 2001
</td> <td> 4.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 4, 2001
</td> <td> 4.3
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 11, 2001
</td> <td> 4.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 18, 2001
</td> <td> 4.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 25, 2001
</td> <td> 4.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 2, 2001
</td> <td> 4.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 9, 2001
</td> <td> 4.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 16, 2001
</td> <td> 5.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 23, 2001
</td> <td> 5.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 30, 2001
</td> <td> 5.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 6, 2001
</td> <td> 5.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 13, 2001
</td> <td> 5.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 20, 2001
</td> <td> 5.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 27, 2001
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 3, 2001
</td> <td> 4.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 10, 2001
</td> <td> 4.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 17, 2001
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 24, 2001
</td> <td> 4.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 1, 2001
</td> <td> 4.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 8, 2001
</td> <td> 4.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 15, 2001
</td> <td> 4.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 22, 2001
</td> <td> 3.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> October 29, 2001
</td> <td> 4.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 5, 2001
</td> <td> 3.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 12, 2001
</td> <td> 4.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 19, 2001
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> November 26, 2001
</td> <td> 4.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 3, 2001
</td> <td> 4.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 10, 2001
</td> <td> 4.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 17, 2001
</td> <td> 4.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 24, 2001
</td> <td> 3.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> December 31, 2001
</td> <td> 2.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 7, 2002
</td> <td> 4.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 14, 2002
</td> <td> 4.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 21, 2002
</td> <td> 4.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> January 28, 2002
</td> <td> 4.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 4, 2002
</td> <td> 4.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 11, 2002
</td> <td> 4.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 18, 2002
</td> <td> 4.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> February 25, 2002
</td> <td> 4.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 4, 2002
</td> <td> 4.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 11, 2002
</td> <td> 4.5
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 18, 2002
</td> <td> 5.3
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> March 25, 2002
</td> <td> 5.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 1, 2002
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 8, 2002
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 15, 2002
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 22, 2002
</td> <td> 4.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> April 29, 2002
</td> <td> 4.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 6, 2002
</td> <td> 4.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 13, 2002
</td> <td> 3.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 20, 2002
</td> <td> 3.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> May 27, 2002
</td> <td> 3.7
</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table border="1" bordercolor="#808080" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="" width="280"><tbody><tr><td> June 3, 2002
</td> <td> 4.1
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 10, 2002
</td> <td> 4.2
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 17, 2002
</td> <td> 3.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> June 24, 2002
</td> <td> 3.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 1, 2002
</td> <td> 3.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 8, 2002
</td> <td> 3.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 15, 2002
</td> <td> 3.8
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 22, 2002
</td> <td> 4.3
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> July 29, 2002
</td> <td> 3.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 5, 2002
</td> <td> 3.7
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 12, 2002
</td> <td> 3.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 19, 2002
</td> <td> 4.0
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> August 26, 2002
</td> <td> 3.9
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 2, 2002
</td> <td> 3.6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 9, 2002
</td> <td> 3.4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td> September 16, 2002
</td> <td> 3.4
</td></tr></tbody></table>

[Kane Knight]

Why must you turn this thread into a house of lies?

[Savio]

<table border="1" bordercolor="#808080" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="280"><tbody><tr><td>September 30, 2002

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>October 7, 2002

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>October 14, 2002

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>October 21, 2002

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>October 28, 2002

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>November 4, 2002

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>November 11, 2002

</td><td>3.1

</td></tr><tr><td>November 18, 2002

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>November 25, 2002

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>December 2, 2002

</td><td>3.3

</td></tr><tr><td>December 9, 2002

</td><td>3.3

</td></tr><tr><td>December 16, 2002

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>December 23, 2002

</td><td>3.3

</td></tr><tr><td>January 6, 2003

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>January 13, 2003

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>January 20, 2003

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>January 27, 2003

</td><td>4.1

</td></tr><tr><td>February 3, 2003

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>February 10, 2003

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>February 17, 2003

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>February 24, 2003

</td><td>4.0

</td></tr><tr><td>March 3, 2003

</td><td>4.5

</td></tr><tr><td>March 10, 2003

</td><td>4.0

</td></tr><tr><td>March 17, 2003

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>March 24, 2003

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>March 31, 2003

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>April 7, 2003

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>April 14, 2003

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>April 21, 2003

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>April 28, 2003

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>May 5, 2003

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>May 12, 2003

</td><td>4.4

</td></tr><tr><td>May 19, 2003

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>May 26, 2003

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>June 2, 2003

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>June 9, 2003

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>June 16, 2003

</td><td>4.1

</td></tr><tr><td>June 23, 2003

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>June 30, 2003

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>July 7, 2003

</td><td>4.2

</td></tr><tr><td>July 14, 2003

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>July 21, 2003

</td><td>4.2

</td></tr><tr><td>July 28, 2003

</td><td>4.2

</td></tr><tr><td>August 4, 2003

</td><td>4.0

</td></tr><tr><td>August 11, 2003

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>August 18, 2003

</td><td>4.0

</td></tr><tr><td>August 25, 2003

</td><td>4.2

</td></tr><tr><td>September 1, 2003

</td><td>4.3

</td></tr><tr><td>September 8, 2003

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>September 15, 2003

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>September 22, 2003

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>September 29, 2003

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>October 6, 2003

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>October 13, 2003

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>October 20, 2003

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>October 27, 2003

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>November 3, 2003

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>November 10, 2003

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>November 17, 2003

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>November 24, 2003

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>December 1, 2003

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>December 8, 2003

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>December 15, 2003

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>December 29, 2003

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>January 5, 2004

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>January 12, 2004

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>January 19, 2004

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>January 26, 2004

</td><td>4.0

</td></tr><tr><td>February 2, 2004

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>February 9, 2004

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>February 16, 2004

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>February 23, 2004

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>March 1, 2004

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>March 8, 2004

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>March 15, 2004

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>March 22, 2004

</td><td>4.5

</td></tr><tr><td>March 29, 2004

</td><td>4.3

</td></tr><tr><td>April 5, 2004

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>April 12, 2004

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>April 19, 2004

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>April 26, 2004

</td><td>4.0

</td></tr><tr><td>May 3, 2004

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>May 10, 2004

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>May 17, 2004

</td><td>4.0

</td></tr><tr><td>May 24, 2004

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>May 31, 2004

</td><td>3.2

</td></tr><tr><td>June 7, 2004

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>June 14, 2004

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>June 21, 2004

</td><td>4.2

</td></tr><tr><td>June 28, 2004

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>July 5, 2004

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>July 12, 2004

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>July 19, 2004

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>July 26, 2004

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>August 2, 2004

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>August 9, 2004

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>August 16, 2004

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>August 23, 2004

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>August 30, 2004

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>September 6, 2004

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>September 13, 2004

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>September 20, 2004

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>September 27, 2004

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>October 4, 2004

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>October 11, 2004

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>October 18, 2004

</td><td>3.0

</td></tr><tr><td>October 25, 2004

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>November 1, 2004

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>November 8, 2004

</td><td>3.6

</td></tr><tr><td>November 15, 2004

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>November 22, 2004

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>November 29, 2004

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>December 6, 2004

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>December 13, 2004

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>December 20, 2004

</td><td>2.7

</td></tr><tr><td>December 27, 2004

</td><td>3.5

</td></tr><tr><td>January 3, 2005

</td><td>3.4

</td></tr><tr><td>January 10, 2005

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>January 17, 2005

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>January 24, 2005

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>January 31, 2005

</td><td>4.1

</td></tr><tr><td>February 7, 2005

</td><td>3.7

</td></tr><tr><td>February 14, 2005

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>February 21, 2005

</td><td>4.0

</td></tr><tr><td>February 28, 2005

</td><td>4.1

</td></tr><tr><td>March 7, 2005

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>March 14, 2005

</td><td>3.8

</td></tr><tr><td>March 21, 2005

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>March 28, 2005

</td><td>4.0

</td></tr><tr><td>April 4, 2005

</td><td>4.3

</td></tr><tr><td>April 11, 2005

</td><td>4.1

</td></tr><tr><td>April 18, 2005

</td><td>3.9

</td></tr><tr><td>April 25, 2005

</td><td>4.0
</td></tr></tbody></table>

[Kane Knight]

So you're just spamming for the sake of spamming?

[Savio]

no those are ratings I got from steveswrestling.com

[Kane Knight]

They're garbage numbers.

[Xero]

Is there any way to get all ratings aside from just the top ten from Nielson?

[Kane Knight]

If you have a corporate presence or are part of the media. I'm tempted to try and sign up, though I don't do entertainment pieces, and so they might not accept me.

[Savio]

I believe this should be stickied

[Kane Knight]

It is sticky. :naughty:

[Kane Knight]

Last week's ratings haven't been put up yet, but I forgot to update last week's posting, so here we are:


Raw Ratings for the week of 6-2-08:
2.7 with 4.73 million viewers.
The other hour failed to place.

It'll be interesting to see what the first showing of the million dollar giveaway did on the actual Nielsen ratings.