AEW - Non-Wrestling (Business, Money, Ratings etc.)

[Prime Time]

To add to the above, I haven't been able to verify this myself yet but there's someone out there citing a decent-looking source that these would be the more detailed numbers for Dynamite - above and beyond the shortened, ranked list that the BARB put out.

Oct 2: Unranked (which means it's seriously low)
Oct 9: 96,000
Oct 16: 143,000
Oct 23: 171,000 (or 167,000, as this new source has a slightly lower figure)
Oct 30: 77,000
Nov 6: 140,000



So, the reason I'm comfortable saying that that first week would have been low is this new source - Thinkbox - lists way more top programmes on a channel. As a comparison, this week's last rated show got only 49,000 viewers (with 7000 of those not watching live but time-shifted).

So, if these numbers are right we know that AEW weren't just missing out on the top list, and that they've actually had only one good rating in the UK. In fact, some of those weeks will look pretty bad put up against WWE when you remember WWE is behind a paywall. There's some talk out there that how easy it is to get to through the ITV Hub has a big bearing on what the weekly number is - whether or not people actually bother to watch the show seems to be influenced by how easy it is to get to it.

What could be interesting is that there's some evidence for the first time that the AEW audience don't behave like other wrestling fans have in recent years, and they are disproportionately likely to watch later, time-shifted. Our ratings take that into account - I don't know if American ones do. But while it's not concrete proof, we do give you something to back up the idea that the AEW crowd think of wrestling differently, and consume it differently, and that ratings that don't take into account time shifted viewing might hurt them more than other places and programmes. Now, wrestling's distinctiveness is one of the few things that has seen it become desirable to networks in recent years, so that might end up being a double-edged sword for them, but it's interesting nonetheless.


But yeah, the tl;dr of all this is ratings here in the UK for Dynamite could well be a lot worse - even worse than a lot of us actually thought possible. I didn't for a minute think they could lose to WWE while they were on free TV and WWE were on a subscription service, but that might well be what has happened a couple of times.


EDIT: I've also seen another site claim that AEW did 232,000 for the Oct 16th show, but they don't cite a source and I can't find anything to corroborate it, so I'm sticking with the numbers I can validate. That'd be definitely less than 168,000, and 143,000 would be consistent with that, so it seems a good enough estimate.

[Mystic]

There is little better than a stipulation broken well and over time. It's almost as simple as, if you tell compelling stories, you can't do anything wrong. If you tell poor stories, you can't do anything right. Whether he bullshits around under a mask or if they find a ground swell way to "Reinstate the Macho Man," I'm good with it, as long as it's done in a compelling manner.

[Cult Icon]

Prime are you doing the total numbers for AEW between the Friday show and the Monday night replay, or you just doing the Friday?

[Prime Time]

That's for the ITV 4 show, for a few reasons, but mainly because I've been looking for both shows and the replay hasn't featured at all.

There's a lot more I could say about how complicated that then gets, and there's points that are good, points that are bad, but I don't know how much detail people want to go into.

But I'm happy to waffle on about British TV and what all the different variables might mean if you're interested.

[Cult Icon]

If you can send me a link to where you're getting the data for the previous weeks that would be super. I found one for the week of November 4th to November 10th, but can't seem to navigate a way to find the previous ratings.

[Prime Time]

If you're looking at Thinkbox, you can't go back to previous weeks (which is why I can't verify it myself). The numbers I mentioned are found by going back through someone else's Twitter feed who reported the numbers as they happened - and, as the most recent ones checked out, I'm assuming I can take the rest at face value, until they give me a reason not to trust them.

I can PM you where I found their feed if you like, but obviously that's not the same as being able to see the numbers for yourself.

If you just want BARB you can go back through previous data, and I can link you to that as well - though that'll only give you the top 15 shows for the channel.

[Cult Icon]

Let's just match up the data you have with what I've got. I have numbers from the Wrestling Observer for the first five weeks and the most recent numbers from this past week that I got from BARB (at least I think I did), so we can see if they line up and clear up any confusion, which I have from the numbers I got.

For Week One the Observer has 81K for the Friday show (shown at 11:20 p.m. according to them), 36K for the Sunday morning show (at 8:20 a.m.) and 279K for the Monday night one hour show on ITV (at 11:45 p.m.).

Week Two initially has 68K on Friday, 24K on Sunday (note the Sunday show is, apparently discontinued after this week) and 232K on Monday. It appears the number may have actually been 31K for Friday instead but I'm not sure (hopefully you can help clear that one up). If the 31K number is accurate then it also had 8K watching on VOD and 57K watching on DVR.

Week Three has 45K live on Friday (note the show moved from 11:20 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on this night), 26K VOD and 72K DVR. No number for the Monday replay.

Week Four has 127K on Friday and 211K on Monday (no VOD or DVR info)

Week Five has 78K on Friday (note the show moved from 10:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.) and 148K on Monday (no VOD or DVR info).

Week Six has 62K on Friday, with the VOD viewership around 8K and DVR around 70K. No Monday rating.

[Prime Time]

It's hard to match up the data here because they seem to be dividing them differently - but what it looks like is that the Friday figures I'm getting include all time-shifted viewing, but don't include the people watching the shorter show. The trouble is that BARB include time-shifted viewing but they don't divide it the way the Observer are, but instead group the people by the device they watched on.

I'm not sure I can make sense of what is going on in the weeks where there was a Sunday show - but the Observers numbers seem to be lower than the estimate for week 2 that these people have from Thinkbox, unless they have just lumped Friday/Sunday together? But yeah, I don't have a convincing answer for that.

Week 3 - the various numbers seem to add up pretty closely to the Thinkbox total, but week 4, I'm not sure where the Observer numbers are - my guess is that is maybe just the live viewers, because the total number elsewhere seems to be much higher. It seems the 77,000 tracks closely to week 5, but then the week 6 seems pessimistic again, so I don't know what to make of them.



The Monday numbers are very interesting. I would have said for all sorts of reasons that the kind of numbers they are quoting there was pretty a much a best case scenario, unlikely but theoretically possible. I'm not able to back it up because the channel they are on is so popular that to hit the top 15 programmes you'd have to get 4 million viewers - but if those turn out to be anywhere near accurate (and I tend to trust the Observer when it comes to this sort of thing) then yeah, it changes things dramatically.

[Cult Icon]

In what way does it change things dramatically?

[Prime Time]

Well, there was no reason to believe that they were that high - in the middle of the night, with a shortened version that was originally the source of some pushback, when you could watch the whole show a few days earlier (or at any point in the weekend through the Hub). So there's a few things you can say: the pure numbers of eyes on the product are clearly higher, for one thing. But if they are doing 211k one week and 148k the next, maybe that introduces the dynamic of a slump in ratings over time.

And I guess there's also this question - if you've got a version of the show that gives you about 45 minutes out of the whole thing, why would people be actively choosing that one, rather than the whole show - which, as I say, is freely available?

It changes the picture a lot, but I'm not sure how many answers we get. I'll keep an eye out and see if I can get anymore info in coming weeks and we'll compare notes again, see how it shapes up to what Dave is reporting.

[Cult Icon]

Well remember; the replay on Monday night is on regular ITV. The full show (which I should point out has gone from 11:20 p.m. to 10 p.m. to 11 p.m. and may have moved again this past week) is on ITV4. Is it possible that could be a factor?

[Prime Time]

Definitely. In fact, it's the only thing that makes sense. But everyone that has ITV1 will have ITV4. It's a less popular channel, but it's not a less widely available channel. So you'd expect the fan to watch the earlier showing on ITV4 or watch on the Hub (which will show up on the Friday numbers, not the repeat, which isn't made available through VOD).

I thought they might get a few more eyes through ITV1 but on a show that comes on 12:40 in the morning, when you could have watched for days, and when people were originally complaining that the late night show wasn't going to be the complete thing, I certainly didn't expect it to be where the majority of viewers came from.

[mizfan]

Stepping away from the numbers a second, I'm excited to see Kris Statlander on Dark tonight. People have been saying AEW needs a woman who comes off as a star for their division, and I think with the bare minimum of right handling that could be Statlander in the very near future.

[PEN15v2]

Stepping away from the numbers a second

Thank you. There isn't a more ridiculous discussion in the IWC than ratings in 2019. It's boring, outside any realm of importance to a fan, and merely used to talk about why one product is superior/inferior to another. It's all about defending your team, and it's tiresome at best.

I've heard good things about Kris, plus rumors she signed/almost signed/ didn't sign with NXT. If she's had an NXT contract in her hands since early this month, but held off for this AEW show, she has great bargaining power wit both brands.

As for the best choice to go with? NXT is the obvious choice as the better roster, but AEW might be the better choice for immediate impact. AEW's women's division is severely lacking, so someone who stands out can get pushed to the top quickly. I could definitely see someone saying that's the better option. And, if she signs for 3 years, the best talent from NXT will likely be main brand by that point. She could then negotiate a main roster contract, if she wanted to explore her options, bypassing NXT.

In terms of short term benefit, signing with AEW would be the smarter choice in my opinion. Long term, it's a toss up. Better growth in NXT, with an established division and the performance center team, and then graduate to main roster to even bigger bucks. But, despite AEW still being new, and not having the established team with their coaching staff, I think it's wiser to go there. WWE's PC best product has been the women, but I still believe the best way to succeed in wrestling is to travel the promotions and learn from everywhere. No amount of guest coaches at the PC can replace real world experience.

[Prime Time]

Thank you. There isn't a more ridiculous discussion in the IWC than ratings in 2019. It's boring, outside any realm of importance to a fan, and merely used to talk about why one product is superior/inferior to another. It's all about defending your team, and it's tiresome at best.

Well, I'm obviously more interested in ratings than you, and as a wrestling fan who doesn't watch AEW that's the only thing about them I am interested in, is how they are doing. But I agree with the point about comparative ratings - seeing who wins Wednesday night, for example - is pretty much worthless, and is used precisely in the way you are saying here.