Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Wrestlenomics Radio - Survey Results

I put a survey up on Twitter about my Wrestlenomics podcast to look more about my audience with some anonymous feedback.

Here's a brief summary of the results:

Q1: Do you regularly listen to the Wrestlenomics Radio podcast?

  • NO - 38%
  • YES - 38%
  • SOMETIMES - 24%
Analysis: While I expected a survey that is mostly distributed by Twitter would include a lot of people who have never listened to my podcast, I was a little surprised the preponderance of responses was non-listeners. For that reason, I implemented a "point system" where I weighted YES/4 point, SOMETIMES/2 point, NO/1 point when looking at answers.

Q2: What topics do you prefer Wrestlenomics Radio to cover?

Options (randomized):

Highest Scores
  • Professional Wrestling Business News (financial filings, investor calls, corporate events)
High Score
  • Content Distribution News (cord-cutting, int'l TV rights, future of media, journalism)
  • Professional Wrestling History (legal, business, media, financial coverage)
Medium Scores
  • Professional Wrestling Legal News (lawsuits, proceedings, exhibits)
  • Professional Wrestling Metrics (Wrestlenomics - win/loss records, research, articles)
Low Score
  • Long-form discussion of recently published articles w/ author(s)
Lowest Scores
  • Guest Interviews
  • Professional Wrestling Discussion (storylines, feuds, booking)
  • MMA Business News (UFC/Bellator legal, business, PPV)

Analysis: I am not surprised to see that MMA business news wasn't highly ranked, and it validates my predisposition not to spend much time covering that industry. Seeing "Content Distribution News" so highly ranked is intriguing. I intrepret that subject as "looking at how the media landscape is transforming in general and the global trends we're seeing regarding how different platforms are developing". It's a subject that continues to interest me, but also something that I could spend more time immersing myself in. I was also very surprised to see "Professional Wrestling History" as highly ranked as it was. While normally a podcast would scoff at the idea of covering (in-depth) the history of WWF television deal making in the 90s, that's exactly the sort of subject matter which Wrestlenomics Radio prides itself on. It's interesting to see that "Professional Wrestling Discussion" ranked so poorly - that suggests that people are getting their fix of that topic from other podcasts. While I could certainly stand to offer my opinion more often, I am comfortable knowing that is not expected to be a major part of my show. Seeing both "Guest Interviews" and "Long-form discussions" lowly provides some interesting feedback. One comment was that I could use a steady co-host and/or show producer. I would agree with that. Overall, I'm glad that what I consider the core of my show - Professional Wrestling Business News - is still what people most expect from my show. Furthermore, as one person commented, I could continue to broaden my focus beyond just WWE to Ring of Honor, FloSlam, New Japan, TNA and other pro-wrestling companies out there.

Q3: When is it best to release new episodes?
  • Regular Rotation (i.e. twice a month) - 53%
  • Immediately following big WWE Corporate events - 24%
  • Whenever (surprise me!) - 23%
Analysis: I was pleasantly surprised to see that the "surprise me" contingent was larger than expected. Historically, the show appears when it's going to appear. However, the resounding feedback is that it's easier to grow and maintain an audience if you're consistent in producing content. This is hardly revolutionary thinking, but it's a worthwhile reminder that there's a lot more I could be doing around producing this sort content on a frequent and predictable basis.

Q4: How do address audience questions?
  • Email - 57%
  • Twitter - 29%
  • Open Lines - 12%
  • None of the Above - 2%
Analysis: This is a meaningful result because it speaks to one of the major concerns that I've had in the past. Normally, I sign up for BlogTalkRadio, I schedule a show, and we're off the races. I usually have my own notes, but I allow for open lines which means I'm plugging phone numbers throughout the show even though the majority of people are going to listen to things on delay. I think considering the in-depth emails that I get which take ages to respond to, it might just be better to turn those correspondences into show topics that are addressed on air and include some element of Twitter as a medium of correspondence. I will likely be discontinuing the use of open lines. This also opens up new options for how I produce and distribute the show.

Q5: Where do you live?
  • United States - 65%
  • Canada - 19% 
  • United Kingdom/Ireland - 8%
  • Other - 8%
Analysis: Wrestling Twitter (and F4W) does seem to have a disproportionate amount of active Europeans fans. I've received calls on my show from as far away as England and South Africa. However, the vast majority of survey respondents are North Americans. It certainly makes sense to keep show production schedules and media talk focused around the domestic marketplace that I'm familiar with. 

Q6: Optimal Podcast Length?
  • 45 minutes to 60 minutes - 39%
  • However long it takes to cover the Story - 31%
  • 30 minutes to 45 minutes - 15%
  • 60 minutes to 90 minutes - 13%
  • 90 minutes+ - 3%
Analysis: This result did surprise me. Considering the plethora of marathon wrestling podcasts out there, I expected there would be more votes for the longer 60+ timeframe. Lucky for me, that doesn't seem to be attitude of my survey respondents. That's encouraging for me because I've often felt that shows under 60 minutes are insufficient. This information really makes me rethink that attitude. Furthermore, the "cover the story" crowd makes a compelling argument that it should be the subject that dictates the length and not the other way around. I appreciate that I think I'm going to work on producing newer episodes that are under an hour. It's possible that I'm burning myself out when I do a 75 minute solo episode when it would have been a better two separate episodes. 

Q7: Medium Preference for Wrestlenomics Radio
  • Audio Podcast - 77%
  • YouTube Podcast (see the hosts speaking) - 14%
  • Audio-Visual Presentation (see slides/charts/financial information) - 9%
Analysis: This result pleased me. I listen to podcasts in my car while I'm driving to/from work, when I'm working in the yard, when I'm on a plane, lying in bed, taking a shower or talking a walk. I don't like to "watch" to podcasts. I don't need to see the hosts talking. I was honestly expected more people would want to see the Audio-Visual presentation (where I would incorporate slides or other data into the podcast), but I'm glad to see that most people are content to just reference this blog or other website for the numbers that are too difficult to describe over the air.

Q8: Podcast Sponsorship 
  • I skip/ignore podcast advertisers - 49%
  • I have visited the website of a podcast advertiser - 44%
  • I have purchased a product after I heard about them on a podcast advertisement - 6%
Analysis: I was curious if this would give me powerful ammunition to approach advertisers about the keen demographics and expansive buying power of my listening audience. It really doesn't. And that's OK. I can't say that I've ever bought a product that was being advertised on a podcast because I heard about it on the podcast. So, I'm in the 94% along with most of my listeners and non-listeners.


This helps a lot. I have a much better vision for what I should be doing with Wrestlenomics Radio. Expect to see more episodes that are a little shorter but that are released more frequently. I will spend more time focusing on the most relevant topics and I will spend more time working on having a steady co-host and more show production. I'll also be soliciting more feedback via Twitter and email before I tape shows so I can answer audience questions. For the time being, I expect Wrestlenomics Radio to stick as a podcast. Thanks to everyone.

More feedback? Send it to @mookieghana on Twitter or email

      No comments: