411mania.com: Wrestling - The Hamilton Ave Journal 04.30.09: Volume 2

The Editorials section is designed for you, the readers, to respond to the views presented in the Journal, send an important news item, or talk about another overlooked business related item in wrestling. Just beware: the Journal reserves the right to respond back.

From the commentary section last week, Richard had a couple of questions related to ratings:

I know you said you only counted the first run ratings. However do you think that on Telemundo Replays and AM RAW get unique audiences or are they just the same people watching it.

While there is most definitely some crossover—especially with AM RAW—for the most part there are unique audience members. Of course, the Telemundo crowd could hit the SAP button, but as far as just watching the show as it, RAW on Telemundo is a destination program. AM RAW is not that; more of a background program. That is why AM RAW's ratings can fluctuate from 0.3 to 1.1 on any given week.

Also do you believe WWE and Nielson's claim that "only 30% of people who watch 'Raw,' our flagship show, will also watch 'SmackDown' on MyNetworkTV and vice versa."

When they first gave that statistic five years ago, yes, it was true. At that time RAW and SmackDown had mostly distinct audiences and the programs were tailored to separate audiences. As time has gone on, ratings for both shows have declined because they tried to make the viewers of one program the viewers of the other. In other words, the WWE sacrificed the unique identities of each program to create a program with more "mass appeal". The problem is the audience that is part of that mass is smaller that the two different audiences that watched RAW and SmackDown when they have different styles and tones.

Now why all the past tense? Because although WWE Chairman Vince McMahon often totes this "30% shared" figure, that figure has not been retested in recent years. Most likely now you'll find a much higher crossover (close to 70% mark) within that smaller audience. That is why the brand extension has become the wrong execution of the right idea. Having distinct brands for different audiences means you can get lots of diverse customers. Having the relatively same program and trying to give it to different audiences means that one or more audiences will be eliminated.

The people watching the WWE are far different than the ones watching five years ago. At that time, the average age of a viewer was 29. That number has come way down with so many older fans leaving and a plethora of children backfilling the need (though not at the same rate as attrition).

While the WWE has been changing its clientele, one person has been a tremendous success for them, as Eric L points out:

Those sales figures are one of the reason I'm shocked to see the IWC going nuts about how ungrateful Jeff Hardy is for not having signed yet. He's very smart for holding out as long as possible and seeing how high the WWE will go.

FirstsMcPain was quick to agree:

Eric L, you just made the best point about the whole Jeff Hardy situation that I've seen anywhere on this website. Kudos to you, sir.

And Guest#0056 finishes up the point:

Exactly what I've been thinking Eric, kudos. All the morons and marks are up in arms spouting off about "Jeff wanting to quit to do drugs" and all this bullshit, when a quick glance at the sales figures shows Jeff being a huge merch seller and a major player money-wise pretty much every week for the last YEAR. Contract negotiations can be complex and take a long time to be settled.

Has anybody considered the possibility that maybe Jeff has stalled on signing a new contract because he feels his huge ability to draw isn't reflected in his position on the card? He is massively OVER and with the right push you feel he could be even bigger. He was pushed big in 2008 after returning from suspension, but on the same hand he also jobbed in a LOT of title shots, de-railing a lot of momentum, and when he eventually received the title it was at one of the lesser-watched PPVs and was taken off him a month later.

It could be something personal like card position, but it may be more on the first point you were making. Perhaps Jeff Hardy just wants a higher cut of his merchandise sales since he moves so much of it. The WWE is notorious of their secret equation to come up with the split on merchandise figures, so maybe all Jeff Hardy wants is some transparency and concrete numbers so he knows what he is getting.

When Jeff Hardy was suspended last, he still remained in the Top Ten. Not even John Cena could remain in the Top Ten when he was out with an injury (though he did last several weeks). Jeff Hardy is aware of that and is most likely just looking for his fair shake.

Outside of Jeff Hardy, the other big topic was on the WWE and piracy (per usual). The WWE's Hulu page looks to have been up for longer than noted by the Journal (as Supro and Anonymous Smart Mark pointed out), but the Hulu page is part of the WWE's program to combat piracy. Tals makes another point around this:

Another problem WWE has with piracy is that Smackdown is taped a day or two in advance so it can be aired in other countries before it airs in the US, these copies meant for countries like Australia end up on the internet before it airs on US TV.

And vice versa. RAW and ECW air in the US before a number of other countries, so it works the other way as well. The WWE may want to consider stepping up the Hulu page and just maintaining full episodes of all their programs on there. At least then they'll continue to have the advertising revenue from the site.

Apple learned long ago that if you make something that is easy to steal even easier to buy, people will buy it. Despite thousands of websites and file sharing services out there, Apple is approaching 7 billion songs sold at the iTunes store (almost $7 billion in gross revenue). Buying at an iTunes store is actually now easier than trying to find illegal shares, so they are making money at it.

The WWE could take a page out of Apple's book and make getting a copy of their program though Hulu, WWE.com, YouTube, or wherever they can make money easier than a bit torrent site. If they do that, than they will have a new revenue stream and not spend so much trying to combat technology.

Plenty more was written, so be sure to take a look. And of course, a week would not be complete without a good dose of JP Prag's own HIDDEN HIGHLIGHTS!!

CLOSING BELL

This concludes Issue #84 (Volume 2) of THE HAMILTON AVE JOURNAL. Join us next week as we get ready to ring the bell again.

Till then!

Post Comment (14) | Email JP Prag | View JP Prag's 411 Profile

Send To Friend |

Stumble It! |

Digg It! |

Please add your comment below.

If you are registered, you can login and post under your registered name. If not, you can post as a guest or register.

* Please note that 411 moderates all comments. Your comment will show up on the site after it has been approved by an editor.

Name :

Comment :

Remaining Characters :

2800

Comments (14)

Why still no ROH on HD net ratings?

Posted By: ScottishDragon (Registered) on April 29, 2009 at 11:19 PM

You forgot to mention that the reason Smackdown did such a horrendous rating was because many of the hot markets, including most of Texas and Portland Oregon, Smackdown was pre-empted because of the NBA Playoffs.

The WWE Ratings have also not decreased in the past five years at the rate you say they do. Ratings have pretty much plateud since 2002 with Raw mainly averaging somewhere between the high 3's and low 4's.

Posted By: Carlos (Guest) on April 29, 2009 at 11:55 PM

You can add Cleveland, OH to the list of markets preempted by the NBA playoffs.

Posted By: Tigerpaw28 (Guest) on April 30, 2009 at 01:36 AM

The problem right now with the WWE's usage of websites is that the programing does not match actual television. Maybe they do this on their legacy site, but on the other pages they have with Hulu, Youtube, Myspace, etc...the clips are old and incomplete. What I and most other fans who search the internet for clips want to see are complete matches and even fulls shows. Most people who would use a website for clips do not have cable or satellite, and therefore rely on the internet to keep up-to-date knowledge of the WWE storyline.

If WWE wants to stop piracy of their programs, they should offer a better way for customers to collect them.

Posted By: Drock77 (Guest) on April 30, 2009 at 04:48 AM

Is Smackdown's new focus on wrestling and workrate likely to lead to any change in the ratings? Did, for example, the fall 2002/Smackdown Six period - an IWC favourite era - actually mean anything to enough people to affect the ratings in any way?

Posted By: bluesteel (Guest) on April 30, 2009 at 07:00 AM

ScottishDragon:

HDNet is a privately owned station and does not release ratings information.

Just as ROH has never released their PPV buys that I can find.

I am an ROH fan, so I wish these were available, but unfortunately they are not.

Posted By: Bonto (Guest) on April 30, 2009 at 02:10 PM

I never realy read this report and this is the first time I've clicked on this.

Great report, a lot of factual analysis of wrestling as a business (because, at the end of the day, it is a business). I like your focus on thios.

Keep up the good work.

Posted By: lilwayne1 (Guest) on April 30, 2009 at 05:03 PM

this has to be the dumbest idea for a wrestling column ive ever seen on this site. of all wrestling fans, i'd wager about 25% are members of the IWC. Of that 25%, i'd wager that less than 5% give a shit about anything covered in this column.

Posted By: the voice of reason (Guest) on April 30, 2009 at 02:23 PM

---------

Yes, but thats only because the other 95% are fucking morons who spout off their shitty opinions without knowing or understanding a single fucking thing about the business itself.

This column isn't perfect, but its excellently researched, relies (for the most part) on facts rather than biased opinion and uncredible gossip, and is a better read than pretty much anything else on this site. Give me The Hamilton Ave Journal over garbage hacks like Aaron Hubbard and Samuel Berman any day.

P.s. JP, I noticed you made reference to Shad, DJ Gabriel and Jeff Hardy discussing contract rumours on social networking sites - I just wanted to point out that the post by Jeff was fake and done by some impersonator (many wrestlers have had problems with random people pretending to be them on facebook and myspace).

The closest thing to an official page for Jeff is http://www.myspace.com/thehardyshow, which Matt Hardy confirms is run by a friend of theirs. This page even has a blog entry up discussing the "Fake Jeff on Facebook", where it says;
"ALL MATT, JEFF and BETH's are FAKES on facebook!! none of them have a page over there!!!!!"

It's always worth not trusting ANY supposed blog by a wrestler unless you can confirm that it is from their official page and is really them. Keep up the good work homeboy.

Posted By: Guest#2886 (Guest) on April 30, 2009 at 05:04 PM

Ratings:
I think ratings news should take into account that, according to the web site TV by the Numbers ratings on Thursday last week were down huge on every net. NBC's lineup hit season lows. Hell's Kitchen was down a million viewers. Survivor was down large, especially in it's demo. When taking Smackdown's rating into account the steep falls across the board should be noted.

Posted By: Eric L. (Guest) on April 30, 2009 at 07:07 PM

I would not pay voice of reason's comment any mind, as it was quite mindless.

Thank you for providing this information, it is appreciated!

Posted By: CanadianCrippler (Guest) on May 01, 2009 at 05:41 AM

I predict a big rise in Smackdown's rating next week. Don't think that's really sticking my neck out either...

Posted By: Ryushinku (Guest) on May 01, 2009 at 06:32 AM

"Ratings:
I think ratings news should take into account that, according to the web site TV by the Numbers ratings on Thursday last week were down huge on every net. NBC's lineup hit season lows. Hell's Kitchen was down a million viewers. Survivor was down large, especially in it's demo. When taking Smackdown's rating into account the steep falls across the board should be noted.

Posted By: Eric L. (Guest) on April 30, 2009 at 07:07 PM"

Wouldn't that hurt TNA and not SD! This week though, with the barn burner that was the Bulls/Celts game last night, I'd expect TNA to drop below 1.2 for the first time in awhile.

Posted By: elgrannoche (Guest) on May 01, 2009 at 11:04 AM