Wow, really makes me think..

>>2248165
DBry was a much bigger merchandise draw, though.
>google searches mean actual buys
????

it shows how irrelevant outlaw wrestling is

>>2248168
It's Google shopping searches, here's the full article

http://www.fightful.com/google-shopping-rankings-wwe-talents-2016-incomplete

Guy seems to have done his research, I think he knows more than you would lad

>>2248168
The chant was over so that didn't help Bryan with merch too much other than one or 2 yes shirts they put out

>>2248175
Your article's wrong.

>>2248182
This

>>2248185
>Your article's wrong.

kek good reply m8.

>>2248188
ty

File: googleshoppingtrends.png (159KB, 981x639px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 981x639px

>>2248175

Really makes you think.

>>2248194
Looks like AJ is either slightly higher or at the same level as Phil during the Summer of Punk, very interesting. Both are ahead of Bryan's peak quite easily

>>2248194
>CM Punk
>Mixed Martial...

>>2248198

Nah, Cena's shit really throws it off in how big of a difference it actually is. AJ looks to be much higher.

>>2248165

Really activates my Bogdanites

File: googleworld.jpg (106KB, 981x639px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 981x639px

>>2248205

Forgot I had it on USA only.

>>2248209
The fact that the interest for AJ actually went up big after his Rumble debut is the most interesting part for me. I figured that would have been his peak, but it looks like the longer he's been there the more interest there's been

>>2248212
The max rating TNA did was 1.1 - 1.2 on Spike TV

>>2248212

Well, you were right in terms of web searches. Merch is a different beast.

File: shoppingcorrelate_0.png (46KB, 625x365px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 625x365px

>>2248223
This is a graph from the same article, the merch seem to especially correlate with the shopping searches in the past two/three years so it's fair to say that something is correct. The fact that he has more interest currently than Phil did in mid 2011 says something

>>2248220
Yes, and then he showed up on a much larger platform and people went from "who's this?" to "wow, he's really fucking good"

File: 1457627696854.png (671KB, 567x619px) Image search: [Google]

671KB, 567x619px

Just because you search something on google doesn't mean you actually buy it you stupid sons of bitches

>>2248228
see
>>2248227

>>2248165
>AJetty
>a draw

lol

AJ Styles has much more merchandise outside the WWE than Daniel Bryan. People are going to use google shopping to find his merch over going to the WWE shop because of this.

google trends are a fraud indicator

anyone using them instantly loses credibility

>>2248165
really makes me think about how bryan popped a 5.0 rating post mania when reigns only got a 3.0 KEK

>>2248227
I had a Stamford wife friend who refused to watch TNA. He only heard of A.J Styles because I raved about him. He now loves A.J Styles in WWE and thinks he's one of the best things in the last few years. So you're right

>>2248280
How so? Genuine question, someone retweeted this guy on my twitter timeline so I went to his page and started reading some of his articles. It seems he knows what he's talking about and does his research

>>2248278
AJ was dead last in interest until he got into WWE, and it's been going up since the Rumble debut. I'm pretty sure most of the new interest is from WWE only fans, and so they'll go to the WWE shop

>>2248284
>reigns

This is about AJ Styles and Bryan, not him

>>2248284
Bryan was an actual draw unlike Reigns OR AJ.

>>2248300
>[anecdotal evidence]

Never works.

File: 1431540329640B.jpg (109KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 700x700px

>>2248194
NO! Phil was out-selling Cena for years! THIS IS WRONG!!!

Google trends is not a reliable tool for comparison.

It is good to look for actual interest in a product, spikes show interest, and search numbers per area can give you a clue if people are interested in.a product that you may want to sell or invest in.

But it is completely non-reliable to gauge sales against one another.

One example: All sites and products have a connection rate, return rate, retain rate etc... Sometimes you have a product that generates a huge amount of searches, or a site with a huge amount of visits, but you dont havea huge amount of completed sales or return customers etc... Same as some stores have a lot of people walking in to look, but not buy anything.

You also don't know how much someone buys at once. For example, many people get complete Cena sets of the shirt hat, wristbands, towel, etc... How can you tell that by a search?

Daniel Bryan also had the towel, and unique merch for different locations, like he had the french 'Oui!' gear for Quebec and France.

Then you have to wonder how much gear is bought at the venue, some people never order stuff but buy at venues, and then you have to remember Kmart has a whole Cena line and is one of the WWE's major outlets.

And Google Analytics can miss many unique searches and different terms making one graph further flawed.

I have a Marketing major and it is my profession, I studied Analytics and all that crap so I know these graphs are stupid and should not be the basis of any serious assumptions. It's just more junk to 'troll' with.

>no one mentioning how unbelievably shitty Bryan's merch was
his only good shirt was the Team Hell No one. Meanwhile, AJ's stuff looks great.

>>2248324
>[anecdotal evidence]
It's a sample of one, which is more than you have.

>>2248194
b-b-b-but people told me >cmcuck was a legit star

lel

btfo

Daniel Bryan BTFO!

>>2248389
This is good info but your point about different places where the merch is sold is addressed here >>2248227

It's obviously not perfect but I would have never thought AJ had more interest than peak Punk or Bryan