The offical TNA thread - News, Spoilers and the rest...

thebostoncrab

mixed up wrote: »

I don't know where you come up wih this crap challenge is not a free channel.

Basic Sky package includes Challenge. It's not part of any of the other packs that you pay the extra €2 for.

Cherry_Cola

mixed up wrote: »

I don't know where you come up wih this crap challenge is not a free channel.

Will I'm not sure about Sky's packages these days but it was always on the most basic of packages, whereas Sky Sports is an extra few quid a month.

thebostoncrab

partyndbs wrote: »

whatever its irrelevant. the fact that tna is even in the same bracket as wwe in the uk is either a credit to tna or a bad inditement of the wwes decline...i think its a bit of both

I'd say it's far from irrelevant. If the only reason TNA gets higher numbers is because it's on a free station then TNA need to recognise that. If they don't then they risk falling into a comfort zone and not trying to get new UK fans who will actualy go out and support the product rather than watching it because there is nothing else on. At least WWE can turn around and say "Right, our UK fans have to pay to watch us, it shows they are willing to spend their money on our product." TNA needs to be able to say the same about their fans.

mixed up

thebostoncrab wrote: »

Basic Sky package includes Challenge. It's not part of any of the other packs that you pay the extra €2 for.

The last time i checked the basic sky package wasn't free though.

thebostoncrab

mixed up wrote: »

The last time i checked the basic sky package wasn't free though.

Just like any digital station. What's your point? It still makes Challenge a free station technically.

partyndbs

and normally people who get the basic package will prob have sky sports

CMpunked

mixed up wrote: »

The last time i checked the basic sky package wasn't free though.

Seems like tnas recent media attack of the UK is starting to pay off.

partyndbs

tna when i watched it was good, just lacks a bigger time feel that wwe has(arena is absolutely terrible). least its unpredictable unlike the bland wwe. theyve pushed the wweizing of it a bit too much but they needed to do this to a certain extent to get over with casual fans. it would be so much better if people like styles daniels were 5 years younger.

thebostoncrab

partyndbs wrote: »

and normally people who get the basic package will prob have sky sports

Actually no, that's not the case. Sky Sports costs around €20 extra, which is a massive amount of money. A friend of mine worked with Sky and said that they have a hard time trying to get people to take Sky. The two big reasons he would get are people have no interest in sport and they can just watch the matches in the pub with mates. I don't have SS myself because it costs too much when all I'll be watching is WWE. €20 with an extra €22 for the PPVs? No thank you, I'll stick with ordering the PPVs and streaming Raw.

jmolloy

right challenge is on the entertainment pack on sky which is €2 a month in ireland £1 in the UK, wwe is on sky sports which is a premium channel starting at €21 euro a month and if you want all 4 sky sport channels which you need to be able to view wwe it's about €28

challenge is also available in the uk on freeview .As of 2010, 77% of the UK population can receive the full Freeview service, with more able to receive some channels before digital switchover and all channels after Coverage is being increased as digital switchover takes place across the UK.Ofcom estimates that the coverage level of the freeview multiplexes will reach 98.5% of the population (the same as analogue television) of the population once the digital switchover has been completed in 2012 which gives it a lot more audience reach than wwe

fair play to tna they are doing well but it's not a fanboy thing to defend wwe in this sense

Machismo Fan

thebostoncrab wrote: »

I'm not trying to say that it would be ****e that TNA beats WWE in the ratings, far from it. I just think the reason TNA get's a higher rating than WWE is because it's free to watch, not because it's TNA.

But more people actually watch Sky Sports than Challenge.

thebostoncrab

Machismo Fan wrote: »

But more people actually watch Sky Sports than Challenge.

For the football and cricket though, not the wrestling.

Those who watch WWE are watching it because they are fans (They'd have to be to pay the extra money), but the figures behind TNA takes into everyone who is just watching it because there isn't anything else on or the kids just want to watch wrestling. It doesn't mean they are watching it because it's TNA.

I'll pull back for a second because I don't want people thinking I'm trying to piss over TNA here. I think it's great that TNA are getting such large numbers, but it's an easy job for them to get such figures because the station is free. I just hope that TNA don't just settle on the figures though, because that doesn't help their product at all. They need to say "Right, we have a massive audience here, let's make sure they become loyal to TNA." and do everything they can to keep people tunning in each week.

Machismo Fan

thebostoncrab wrote: »

Those who watch WWE are watching it because they are fans (They'd have to be to pay the extra money), but the figures behind TNA takes into everyone who is just watching it because there isn't anything else on or the kids just want to watch wrestling. It doesn't mean they are watching it because it's TNA.

If that were the case their numbers would be stagnant rather than growing steadily. There would be the percentage that watch TNA every week plus the people that just watch it because it's on. But even if that were the case in their first week on Challenge, those people are all coming back and then some. It's grossly unfair to say people are watching TNA just because there's nothing else on, and realistically if that is the case, a very similar proportion of WWE's audience is most likely the exact same thing.

parker kent

Machismo Fan wrote: »

The first showing of iMPACT! for the week ending May 1st did 200,000 with the Saturday replay doing 121,000 (321,000 combined). The first showing of Raw did 128,000 with a Friday replay doing 51,000 (179,000 combined) and the first showing of Smackdown did 135,000 with a replay doing 34,000 (169,000 combined) so we can now categorically say by a very, very large margin that iMPACT! is the most watched wrestling TV show in the UK.

You would need to track the ratings over a much longer period than one week to state that categorically. There are legitimate outside factors that may have contributed to a lower Raw rating that weekend. Any single week is open to variations. I'm not going to recycle the arguments above, but some of the guys have raised legitimate points.

You also must consider the WWE's ratings being diluted by the brand extension creating 2 Brands each with their own highlights show. Then consider the various ways people can watch their shows. Yes I know many will watch both Raw and Smackdown, but it is not the same as having 1 main show each week. It would be interesting to see the total amount of unique viewers the WWE gets each week in total. Think of the amount of people who stream Raw, the people who catch the highlights shows instead and then the people watch either Raw or Smackdown but not both.

Before the sniping begins, this is not me being a fanboy or any other wankery term. I'm just saying any basic module on research would get students to consider all the factors. Yes these are positive results for TNA and they should celebrate them. But it is not a direct like-for-like comparison.

kevindominguez

yep.. it does..

stiffler123

jmolloy wrote: »

fair play to tna they are doing well but it's not a fanboy thing to defend wwe in this sense

Maybe, but in a sense it is a fanboy thing as well. When TNA were getting whooped in the ratings by WWE, lots of people were coming on here bashing TNA- as they still do. But now that TNA are winning, we get this free to air BS.

parker kent

stiffler123 wrote: »

Maybe, but in a sense it is a fanboy thing as well. When TNA were getting whooped in the ratings by WWE, lots of people were coming on here bashing TNA- as they still do. But now that TNA are winning, we get this free to air BS.

There are genuine points being written off as fanboy-ism. I think the issue people have is the idea that we can categorically state TNA are number 1 in the UK when there are debatable issues.

stiffler123

parker kent wrote: »

There are genuine points being written off as fanboy-ism. I think the issue people have is the idea that we can categorically state TNA are number 1 in the UK when there are debatable issues.

True, but nobody was debating it when TNA had lower UK ratings than WWE- that's all I'm saying. Not trying to antagonize anyone.

JP Liz V1

Chris Sabin is going for knee surgery

drayme

stiffler123 wrote: »

When TNA were getting whooped in the ratings by WWE, lots of people were coming on here bashing TNA- as they still do.

Link this happening in regards to the UK ratings?

the groutch

the more significant factor is that TNA viewship is growing and growing, whereas the WWE viewship is stagnant at best.

drayme

the groutch wrote: »

the more significant factor is that TNA viewship is growing and growing, whereas the WWE viewship is stagnant at best.

WWE has been on Sky for what since 1987 or something? It is hardly going to grow at same rate TNA is.

sliotor

I think its good tna is going well on the uk market, i think another point to note is alot more people will have challenge than sky sports as it is an additional cost.

stiffler123

drayme wrote: »

Link this happening in regards to the UK ratings?

I didn't mention it in regards to the UK ratings.

drayme

stiffler123 wrote: »

I didn't mention it in regards to the UK ratings.

Exactly.

Ducky the clearance for WWE and TNA are pretty much equal in the States they arent in the UK. Ive no idea why you are celebrating a win in the ratings WAR in the UK as a result.

Machismo Fan

drayme wrote: »

Ducky the clearance for WWE and TNA are pretty much equal in the States they arent in the UK. Ive no idea why you are celebrating a win in the ratings WAR in the UK as a result.

Why wouldn't you celebrate being the most watched wrestling TV show in the UK?

Eric Young vs. Robbie E from this weeks Xplosion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IKscttBkkY

Headshot

^^^that was very funny

drayme

Machismo Fan wrote: »

Why wouldn't you celebrate being the most watched wrestling TV show in the UK?

I am talking about making comparisons when comparisons shouldnt really be made.

stiffler123

drayme wrote: »

Exactly.

Ducky the clearance for WWE and TNA are pretty much equal in the States they arent in the UK. Ive no idea why you are celebrating a win in the ratings WAR in the UK as a result.

I wasn't celebrating. I was saying that when WWE were winning, there was a lot of comments like "TNA and the ten fans who watch it" etc and just bashing the company in general. Now that TNA are clear winners, (in the UK) it's up for debate.

My main point was just the TNA bashing really. I understand constructive criticism but plain bashing is just poor form. In the WWE forum fair enough, but in a TNA thread it's borderline trolling.

drayme

stiffler123 wrote: »

I wasn't celebrating. I was saying that when WWE were winning, there was a lot of comments like "TNA and the ten fans who watch it" etc and just bashing the company in general. Now that TNA are clear winners, (in the UK) it's up for debate.

My main point was just the TNA bashing really. I understand constructive criticism but plain bashing is just poor form. In the WWE forum fair enough, but in a TNA thread it's borderline trolling.

I guess some people cant take a joke...