Maikeru Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 1995 Sep - Dec 2.41 1996 2.65 1997 2.7 1998 4.35 1999 5.9 2000 5.88 2001 4.64 2002 4.01 2003 3.76 2004 3.67 2005 3.81 2006 3.9 2007 3.61 2008 3.27 2009 3.57 2010 3.28 2011 3.21 2012 3 2013 3.01 2014 2.95 2015 2.64 2016 2.26  These are the average RAW ratings for the US by year (1995 ratings are only available from September only). 1993/4 ones are also not readily available without sifting through over a hundred observers, but I believe they mostly hovered around the low 2s.  I do believe the Network, NXT and the amount of WWE content in general has increased the very hardcore fan base in recent years and that, coupled with the ease and affordability of travel nowadays allows them to pull in close to 100K fans for Mania etc - but this of course is not representative of the fan base as a whole.  Yes they have expanded more internationally (though still with only 24% of revenue coming from outside North America), yes they have 1.5m Network subscribers and yes we do need to account for the increased popularity of other streaming channels for casual fans (most notably the WWE Youtube Channel) in weighing all of this up. However, I dare say it looks like they may now back to at least 1997 levels (post mid nineties dark ages but very much prior to the attitude era boom) in terms of regular viewership worldwide? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam O'Rourke Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Domestically that's the case. The ratings starting in September 95 misleads a little, as ratings in the Summer of 95 for Raw were the highest they'd ever been at that point (and house shows at their lowest, in a funny dynamic). Of course there were still far higher numbers watching wrestling in general with another company doing numbers as good or better. Â Yeah - WWE's structure and nature has forced the industry into more of a niche appeal than ever, which is bizarrw when you consider wrestling worked so well for so long because it had such an easy appeal. Its not so easily appealing with the WWE content overload and shitty Raw television model, or the hardcore WWE fans espousing their tastes on the big shows and making the perception game with the key players a tricky one for casuals to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted January 12, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted January 12, 2017 It's so hard to know. How many people watch Raw live? I think we know that. How many DVR it and watch later? How many watch it illegally? How many watch it or part of it on YouTube? How many watch the replays and the catch up shows? And all of that is global. Â There's no real way of knowing. It's clearly nowhere near as popular as peak 1998-2001. But even compared to 10 or 12 years ago, technology has changed so much. Â At the end of the day, it's utterly irrelevant. The only thing that has relevance is their revenue. If you want change in their product, it's unlikely until they stop making money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 It's so hard to know. How many people watch Raw live? I think we know that. How many DVR it and watch later? How many watch it illegally? How many watch it or part of it on YouTube? How many watch the replays and the catch up shows? And all of that is global. Â There's no real way of knowing. It's clearly nowhere near as popular as peak 1998-2001. But even compared to 10 or 12 years ago, technology has changed so much. Â At the end of the day, it's utterly irrelevant. The only thing that has relevance is their revenue. If you want change in their product, it's unlikely until they stop making money. that's true, but I think a key thing now is that the product is pretty obtuse and incomparable to when they were at their hottest. My casual mate, who fondly remembers the likes of Rock and Angle and wanted to give the current product a go, tuned in a while ago and liked a lot of what they saw, but I was having to explain to them why Roman Reigns was unpopular, which meant I had to explain who Daniel Bryan was and the whole 'yes movement' thing, which meant I had to explain what ROH was and all sorts of other stuff. It's just such a mouthful now. It spoke for itself back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undefeated Steak Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 At the end of the day, it's utterly irrelevant. The only thing that has relevance is their revenue. If you want change in their product, it's unlikely until they stop making money. Â Bang on there Rick. Really well put. Judging WWE's popularity or success on their domestic Raw ratings is so antiquated now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members garynysmon Posted January 12, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted January 12, 2017  At the end of the day, it's utterly irrelevant. The only thing that has relevance is their revenue. If you want change in their product, it's unlikely until they stop making money.  Bang on there Rick. Really well put. Judging WWE's popularity or success on their domestic Raw ratings is so antiquated now.   Wrestling has never been as accessible has it? I would have given my left arm to have hours upon hours of WWF, WCW etc when I was a kid. But, following up from some of the earlier points, the wrestling community (especially online) is a bit of an echo chamber.  The huge annual attendances at Wrestlemania is no indicator of how popular the WWE is, to the same degree that poor ratings aren't either. Wrestlemania has almost become the Ryder Cup of wrestling, the same as people who don't really watch Golf from one year to the next, making a special effort to watch. You're guaranteed to have at least a few favourites from when you actually liked wrestling on the show, but most of not all these won't be watching for the other 11 months. I've said it before, Wrestlemania is almost too big for the company's good these days.  I can't see things changing though, over produced, overtly glossy tv and everything being micromanaged from top to bottom. You can't blame the WWE with proceeding with something that makes them money (what good business wouldn't?) But its the reason why I have no real interest in the current product, and I'm surely not the only one in the same boat. Can you genuinely see another megastar getting over organically, before creative gets a hold of the character and moulds it (ruins it) into their vision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Au Posted January 12, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted January 12, 2017 The declining Raw ratings will definitely become a key indicator in their success when it comes time to renew their TV rights deal. They reckoned they were in for way more last time around than they got and I can only imagine it'll be less again next time unless they improve those numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.E Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Wasn't the amount they got because the TV networks just see WWE as "LOL Wrestling" rather than a legit sport? (I seem to recall them thinking they'd get similar money to other major brands such as NASCAR). Â The ratings thing I don't think is a major thing any more, with it being more accessible than ever (Network, YouTube, DVD, various clip shows on other channels etc), and from what I seen WWE is hugely popular with younger kids, which may be no surprise but I don't recall many kids being into it when I was younger, until it was the IN thing during the attitude era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon-Carr_92 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 It really is quite something they lasted so long as a 3 hour show. Even the die hards have a lot to invest. 6 hours a week if you watch Raw, SmackDown & NXT. And another if you stick around for 205 Live. Which I am yet to see a single episode of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members garynysmon Posted January 12, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted January 12, 2017 From what I seen WWE is hugely popular with younger kids, which may be no surprise but I don't recall many kids being into it when I was younger, until it was the IN thing during the attitude era. Â I sincerely doubt its as popular with kids as it was in this country from 1991-1993 or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 The declining Raw ratings will definitely become a key indicator in their success when it comes time to renew their TV rights deal. They reckoned they were in for way more last time around than they got and I can only imagine it'll be less again next time unless they improve those numbers. Â I think that depends on the TV landscape as a whole. WWE is, directly, either a money-loser for the USA Network or at least not much better than breakeven. But the ratings for WWE push up USA's overall standings on the list of cable channels (well they did pre-2014 anyway). If it still does the same job there, they can probably expect the same kind of deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.E Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017  From what I seen WWE is hugely popular with younger kids, which may be no surprise but I don't recall many kids being into it when I was younger, until it was the IN thing during the attitude era.  I sincerely doubt its as popular with kids as it was in this country from 1991-1993 or so.  I only go off what I see/hear in relation to kids at my daughters school, but most little lads there at the very least know WWE, with a fair few having like a WWE bag or lunch bag or something like that.  Maybe not as popular as that time, (I wasn't into it myself then either), but I'm aware its more popular than it has been at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Undefeated Steak Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 I wonder how much video gaming has taken away from WWE (obviously they've got their own games) but almost every young person you see now spends their free time on the Xbox or Playstation instead of watching telly. Consoles were popular when I was younger but we didn't spend a fraction of the amount of time that kids spend on them now. TV shows as a whole seemed to be a much bigger deal back then as well. You don't get the big crazes and phenomena anymore outside of new video games. I can't remember the last new one. Harry Potter maybe? A child's more likely to spend a few hours on COD or their iPad than watching Raw after school. Didn't GTA V do something crazy like $800 million in its first day? There's no way a market that big isn't having a seismic effect on other entertainment markets and companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sphinx Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 I was actually thinking the other day how there was a correlation between the games going shit and my interest in wrestling declining. SmackDown vs Raw 2006 was the last game I got, and I'd say my interest started declining around then. Â If you can make a game that is actually good and people will play each other online or multiplayer, wrestling can become more relevant again from kids through to adults. I don't know if beat-em-ups are as popular as when the likes of Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat and Tekken were in their pomp (I'd guess not) but I still see it as a really good way of becoming more relevant again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted January 12, 2017 Moderators Share Posted January 12, 2017 A 2.1 in 97 is fewer eyes than 2017, so lowest number is possibly a misnomer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.