Quote:
Originally Posted by Kane Knight
I'd say that this is probably the least inaccurate method to measure. That's not to say it's a good way, so much as the besst only inasmuch as it's the least worst.
|
Yeah, I'm hesitant to use that way because of the following reasons:
1) I know of at least one case where Chris Jericho's girl friend bought him an action figure of himself (and someone else whose name escapes me) in one of those double action figure sets. Ir rang up as a Hulk Hogan action figurer thus adding to Hogan's merch sales. Now that is only one case, but that is enough for a seed of doubt.
2) Rating do not equal drawling by a particular star. Rating can be effected by a number of things. Now more accurately, what should be studied is change in ratings per segment. For example when Nitro announced that Mick Foley would be winning the title on raw and rating shot up, that increase was for Mick Foley.
3) Another reason ratings do not equal drawing ability of any one star is because ratings have a lot to do with last week or previous shows. It doesn't matter how hot tonights show is if the past few weeks have been piss poor and drove fans way.
4) The hardest thing about tracking drawing ability poor booking can hurt drawing ability. Imagine if Booker T who has worked through bad booking would finally get great booking, he could turn into an all time great. But it is hard to tell.
Plus again, with WCW i don't believe it was the payroll for the roster. It was bad booking, bad money management, wasting it on extras that weren't wrestling, and lack of any hierarchy. But I would love to see some hard number to prove it. I have read death of WCW a few times, but R. D. Reynolds and Bryan Alvarez couldn't read a financial statement to save their lives.