https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe- ... -49-315856


By Dave Meltzer | @davemeltzerWON | Jul 21, 2020 2:08 pm

Raw last night did the second lowest audience in the modern history of the show and tied the May 4 episode for the lowest ever in 18-49.

Overall, this could be considered the most sobering number in show history.

The show averaged 1.63 million viewers and a 0.46 rating in 18-49. Total viewers were up four percent from last week's record low viewer number, and 18-49 was down four percent. Really it was a far worse number given
it came a day after a pay-per-view that was designed for curiosity and to build Raw more than usual. It was also heavily built around the Randy Orton vs. Big Show unsanctioned match that had been promoted for weeks. The third hour, with Orton vs. Big Show, did a 0.42 in 18-49, the lowest rated hour in 18-49 in the show's history.

In theory, next week's show with two title matches should do better, but that's a hot shot and even if it helps slightly, the pattern long-term is not good.

In total viewers, the 1.54 million third hour beat only the 1.50 million for last week's hour three.

Still, television is changing. Raw was in 21st place overall, fourth among non-news shows. The only shows that beat Raw besides news shows in overall viewers were three episodes of 90 Day Fiance on TLC. The only shows that beat Raw in 18-49 were two of those episodes and Below Deck Mediterranean on Bravo, while the third 90 Day Fiance tied Raw for fourth place in the key demo.

Raw had a stronger first hour audience based on PPV curiosity, likely related to the interest level in the Rey Mysterio match. Once that was covered, the audience first-to-third hour decline was 12 percent, a normal level figure, but higher than in recent weeks.

Declines in first-to-third hour viewers were 24 percent in women 18-49, 14 percent in men 18-49, 32 percent in teenage girls, 41 percent in teenage boys (one of the largest ever, reversing a pattern where teenage boys had stayed in greater numbers for the entire show) and two percent in over 50. Really it was the over 50 audience that saved the third hour from being even lower.

A comparison with last year this week is misleading. Last year's Raw this week was the Raw Reunion show with Hulk Hogan, Steve Austin, Ric Flair and Shawn Michaels advertised as all appearing. Raw was down 47 percent in viewers, 60 percent in 18-49 and 76 percent in 18-34 from that show.

The three hours were:

8 p.m. 1.74 million viewers
9 p.m. 1.61 million viewers
10 p.m. 1.54 million viewers

pushing new people has failed, doing old attitude era vs ruthless aggression dudes failed. I wouldn't be surprised if the brand extensions ends again soon

cero2k wrote: ↑Jul 21st, '20, 20:28 pushing new people has failed, doing old attitude era vs ruthless aggression dudes failed. I wouldn't be surprised if the brand extensions ends again soon

I don't think it's quite fair to say that pushing new people "failed" because they didn't give it enough time. Other than Seth, Rey, and Lashley (and Edge and Orton who never wrestle on TV), pretty much everyone in the Raw men's division is getting their first sustained push on the main roster (Owens hasn't been around enough to really help out). When you're trying to build a whole new crop of guys all at the same time, it's going to take six months or a year before you start seeing any growth, unless someone really catches fire.

Big Red Machine wrote: ↑Jul 21st, '20, 21:37
I don't think it's quite fair to say that pushing new people "failed" because they didn't give it enough time. Other than Seth, Rey, and Lashley (and Edge and Orton who never wrestle on TV), pretty much everyone in the Raw men's division is getting their first sustained push on the main roster (Owens hasn't been around enough to really help out). When you're trying to build a whole new crop of guys all at the same time, it's going to take six months or a year before you start seeing any growth, unless someone really catches fire.

Vince's lack of patience is indeed a problem, it probably has rubbed off on a lot of fans, but we can't ignore numbers went down during Heyman's push of newer guys, Galloway, Black, all those guys.

cero2k wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 09:11

Big Red Machine wrote: ↑Jul 21st, '20, 21:37
I don't think it's quite fair to say that pushing new people "failed" because they didn't give it enough time. Other than Seth, Rey, and Lashley (and Edge and Orton who never wrestle on TV), pretty much everyone in the Raw men's division is getting their first sustained push on the main roster (Owens hasn't been around enough to really help out). When you're trying to build a whole new crop of guys all at the same time, it's going to take six months or a year before you start seeing any growth, unless someone really catches fire.

Vince's lack of patience is indeed a problem, it probably has rubbed off on a lot of fans, but we can't ignore numbers went down during Heyman's push of newer guys, Galloway, Black, all those guys.

But numbers going down is a known consequence of pushing a whole crop of new guys. It's a sports team rebuilding. Numbers went down, but that doesn't mean the idea was failing. And yes, Vince's impatience is what killed it, but I don't think it's fair to blame Vince's attitude for fan impatience. It's 2020. Fans have been impatient for years. It's our social media viral culture (mean pun very much intended) that is to blame for the short attention spans.

Big Red Machine wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 10:41

cero2k wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 09:11

Big Red Machine wrote: ↑Jul 21st, '20, 21:37
I don't think it's quite fair to say that pushing new people "failed" because they didn't give it enough time. Other than Seth, Rey, and Lashley (and Edge and Orton who never wrestle on TV), pretty much everyone in the Raw men's division is getting their first sustained push on the main roster (Owens hasn't been around enough to really help out). When you're trying to build a whole new crop of guys all at the same time, it's going to take six months or a year before you start seeing any growth, unless someone really catches fire.

Vince's lack of patience is indeed a problem, it probably has rubbed off on a lot of fans, but we can't ignore numbers went down during Heyman's push of newer guys, Galloway, Black, all those guys.

But numbers going down is a known consequence of pushing a whole crop of new guys. It's a sports team rebuilding. Numbers went down, but that doesn't mean the idea was failing. And yes, Vince's impatience is what killed it, but I don't think it's fair to blame Vince's attitude for fan impatience. It's 2020. Fans have been impatient for years. It's our social media viral culture (mean pun very much intended) that is to blame for the short attention spans.

Not to mention a culture of instant gratification.

Serujuunin wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 11:57

Big Red Machine wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 10:41

cero2k wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 09:11

Vince's lack of patience is indeed a problem, it probably has rubbed off on a lot of fans, but we can't ignore numbers went down during Heyman's push of newer guys, Galloway, Black, all those guys.

But numbers going down is a known consequence of pushing a whole crop of new guys. It's a sports team rebuilding. Numbers went down, but that doesn't mean the idea was failing. And yes, Vince's impatience is what killed it, but I don't think it's fair to blame Vince's attitude for fan impatience. It's 2020. Fans have been impatient for years. It's our social media viral culture (mean pun very much intended) that is to blame for the short attention spans.

Not to mention a culture of instant gratification.

Yeah. That's definitely a thing, too. And while I hate it and think it wrecks good storytelling, in WWE's case I'm actually willing to blame this on them, as it's not like they're telling good stories and people are losing interest half way through. WWE is telling bad stories and doing so in a way that is trying to swim upstream against the instant gratification problem.

Big Red Machine wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 12:29

Serujuunin wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 11:57

Big Red Machine wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 10:41

But numbers going down is a known consequence of pushing a whole crop of new guys. It's a sports team rebuilding. Numbers went down, but that doesn't mean the idea was failing. And yes, Vince's impatience is what killed it, but I don't think it's fair to blame Vince's attitude for fan impatience. It's 2020. Fans have been impatient for years. It's our social media viral culture (mean pun very much intended) that is to blame for the short attention spans.

Not to mention a culture of instant gratification.

Yeah. That's definitely a thing, too. And while I hate it and think it wrecks good storytelling, in WWE's case I'm actually willing to blame this on them, as it's not like they're telling good stories and people are losing interest half way through. WWE is telling bad stories and doing so in a way that is trying to swim upstream against the instant gratification problem.

Oh 100%. To me it’s like driving your car until you’re out of gas and then being surprised when it stops. They’re not doing anything to help themselves and just plugging on doggedly, thinking they’re not doing anything wrong.

I feel like it all comes down to a phenomenon that plagues just about every company. Management has no idea what is really happening because they only see data.

Serujuunin wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 16:44

I feel like it all comes down to a phenomenon that plagues just about every company. Management has no idea what is really happening because they only see data.

That's not the case here, though. The problem here is that Vince is unwilling to change. He knows exactly what is happening because he's got a death-grip on Creative and tries to adjust based on the ratings.

Big Red Machine wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 20:54

Serujuunin wrote: ↑Jul 22nd, '20, 16:44

I feel like it all comes down to a phenomenon that plagues just about every company. Management has no idea what is really happening because they only see data.

That's not the case here, though. The problem here is that Vince is unwilling to change. He knows exactly what is happening because he's got a death-grip on Creative and tries to adjust based on the ratings.

Does he though? Or is it like that Principal Skinner meme? “Am I out of touch? No, it’s the audience that’s wrong”

Serujuunin wrote: ↑Jul 24th, '20, 01:33

Does he though? Or is it like that Principal Skinner meme? “Am I out of touch? No, it’s the audience that’s wrong”

he's definitely out of touch, but i don't think he thinks the audience is wrong, maybe more like he thinks his stuff still works, every now and then he accepts to do something different, doesn't work, and reverts to his old ways

cero2k wrote: ↑Jul 24th, '20, 08:24

Serujuunin wrote: ↑Jul 24th, '20, 01:33

Does he though? Or is it like that Principal Skinner meme? “Am I out of touch? No, it’s the audience that’s wrong”

he's definitely out of touch, but i don't think he thinks the audience is wrong, maybe more like he thinks his stuff still works, every now and then he accepts to do something different, doesn't work, and reverts to his old ways

I think I fall someone between these two opinions. I think he realizes that the audience wants something different, but in some cases he just won't change, and in others he will try to change but is incapable of doing it right and just doesn't understand why the thing that he is doing isn't being received the way that others have been. The majority opinion seems to be that the Boneyard Match was excellent, but all of WWE's other fully-cinematic matches seem to mostly be met with "meh at best" by some and a lot of hate by others, while the semi-cinematic Edge vs. Orton was praised for the wrestling content but most people seem to have disliked the cinematic aspects of the presentation, and Vince doesn't understand why.