quote:

Originally posted by Lost_Dom:
Ouch for Lost. Beaten by a CSI repeat.

As expected, after only a couple of weeks of new Lost, CSI repeats beat it in the viewer numbers. The big jump up for WaT should give it a huge victory in viewers and maybe even a demo victory. Was this the repeat of the CSI/WaT crosssover or something? Why did WaT gain so much?

quote:

Originally posted by Lost_Dom:

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:
Marc's Mediaweek link overnight numbers:

CSI  (R)   8.6/13
Lost       7.6/11

WaT (R)    9.0/15
Eli Stone  4.8/ 8

Ouch for Lost. Beaten by a CSI repeat.

Not only did it lose to a CSI repeat, but the earlier American Idol lead-in boosted Don't Forget the Lyrics to a 7.8/12, so it may edge out LOST in viewers as well.

quote:

Originally posted by Justin:

quote:

Originally posted by AL:

quote:

Originally posted by Texas Bound:

quote:

Originally posted by filmkr27:
Is anyone else mad or puzzled why Fox is holding 24 back for a full year? Why not air it in the fall? Doesn't this mean that this show will always be one year behind?

Baseball.

It is not b/c of baseball. FOX actually does not have that much baseball in the postseason anymore. It is b/c they like to run the episodes 24 straight through, and starting in the fall would not allow that. Networks generally run repeats around the holidays.

Exactly. Sports are slowly making way to cable.

Baseball playoffs is what causes the inability for 24 to run continously in the fall. It is not so much regular season baseball. This year FOX will broadcast the NLCS and World Series.

CSI repeats unbelievably strongly. I mean, an 8.6? That must be like 14 million. Lost will probably pull in 13 million, which is respectable and then a whoppin' 5-6 in the demo. Eli Stone's viewership probably won't be anything to brag about (7-8 mil), but the demo should be pleasing enough, thanks to Lost as a strong demo lead-in.

I didn't really expect Lost to keep it's viewership numbers.. I mean, it's a heavily serialized drama and shows of that kind only bleed viewers.

quote:

Originally posted by AL:

quote:

Originally posted by TV-aholic:
Is that just 63 games in the CHICAGO Market?

Superstation WGN is a different feed than WNG Chicago.
Her in Indy, and anywhere else outside of Chi-town, you can watch Air-Bud to night (Friday 02/22) on WGN, not Smackdown.

I wonder if some cubs games are broadcast on the "Superstation" that are not aired locally in Chicago?

quote:

Originally posted by T Dog:
In fact, just today (or actually yesterday) there was a Tribune article stating that the Cubs are moving more games to cable and are only televising 63 games this year, a record low. Why? Because their rights fees are higher on cable than on WGN, and of course - so it won't conflict with CW programming. With the poor ratings CW has, you'd think WGN would try to air more games, which would defiantly get higher ratings. But baseball skews older (even with the Cubs), and it probably wouldn't make financial sense for WGN or the Cubs.

I think that all of the games that the Cubs broadcast on WGN are aired nationally on the Superstation and locally in Chicago. I know they have a separate national feed of WGN from the local channel in Chicago, but I don't think they have any games locally that are not covered nationally or vice versa.

Right,Al. And Tribune writer made a point of saying how his emails reflect dismay from out of town Cub fans who are disturbed about these continuing reductions.

I knew they were going down, but this cut to 63 represents a cut in half from just 10 years ago.

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by Lost_Dom:
Ouch for Lost. Beaten by a CSI repeat.

As expected, after only a couple of weeks of new Lost, CSI repeats beat it in the viewer numbers. The big jump up for WaT should give it a huge victory in viewers and maybe even a demo victory. Was this the repeat of the CSI/WaT crosssover or something? Why did WaT gain so much?

Those numbers make no sense, unless my theory of LOST benefiting from the special AI earlier in the evening actually turned out to benefit the CSI/WAT episodes instead. Still, when the rest of their lineup is at significant season lows, it makes no sense that these two shows would post such dramatic increases over the last few weeks.

I'll wait for the fast nationals and actual viewer/demo numbers before reaching a conclusion. But as I mentioned earlier, last night's LOST was not as good as the previous 3 -- but to leave an original LOST to watch a repeat of CSI really makes no sense.

quote:

Originally posted by Lost_Dom:

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:
Marc's Mediaweek link overnight numbers:

CSI  (R)   8.6/13
Lost       7.6/11

WaT (R)    9.0/15
Eli Stone  4.8/ 8

Ouch for Lost. Beaten by a CSI repeat.

Not included in this post is that DFTL (7.8/12) ALSO beat LOST.

BTW, the CSI & WAT episode were the Crossover storyline from this past November.

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by Lost_Dom:
Ouch for Lost. Beaten by a CSI repeat.

As expected, after only a couple of weeks of new Lost, CSI repeats beat it in the viewer numbers. The big jump up for WaT should give it a huge victory in viewers and maybe even a demo victory. Was this the repeat of the CSI/WaT crosssover or something? Why did WaT gain so much?

My guess is the crossover eps which got oodles of promotion again during the hours of Big Brother I watched, are the reason for the week to week pickup. Good scheduling move by CBS, but I'm guessing next week that it goes back down a bit. Still, very very solid for CSI. Kudos to Lost and DFTL as well and Supernatural for holding up with a repeat lead in. Should be at about recent averages. Eli Stone and Lipstick were disappointing. Lets hope ES can at least pull a 3.0 demo.

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce:

quote:

Originally posted by AL:

quote:

Originally posted by TV-aholic:
Is that just 63 games in the CHICAGO Market?

Superstation WGN is a different feed than WNG Chicago.
Her in Indy, and anywhere else outside of Chi-town, you can watch Air-Bud to night (Friday 02/22) on WGN, not Smackdown.

I wonder if some cubs games are broadcast on the "Superstation" that are not aired locally in Chicago?

quote:

Originally posted by T Dog:
In fact, just today (or actually yesterday) there was a Tribune article stating that the Cubs are moving more games to cable and are only televising 63 games this year, a record low. Why? Because their rights fees are higher on cable than on WGN, and of course - so it won't conflict with CW programming. With the poor ratings CW has, you'd think WGN would try to air more games, which would defiantly get higher ratings. But baseball skews older (even with the Cubs), and it probably wouldn't make financial sense for WGN or the Cubs.

I think that all of the games that the Cubs broadcast on WGN are aired nationally on the Superstation and locally in Chicago. I know they have a separate national feed of WGN from the local channel in Chicago, but I don't think they have any games locally that are not covered nationally or vice versa.

Righto. And Tribune writer made a point of saying how his emails reflect dismay from out of town Cub fans who are disturbed about these continuing reductions.

I knew they were going down, but this cut to 63 represents a cut in half from just 10 years ago.

If I recall, any games not aired on the WGN feeds airs on Comcast so at least with cable most people in the Chicagoland area can see them.

quote:

Originally posted by Texas Bound:

quote:

Originally posted by Justin:
Exactly. Sports are slowly making way to cable.

Baseball playoffs is what causes the inability for 24 to run continously in the fall. It is not so much regular season baseball. This year FOX will broadcast the NLCS and World Series.

At most, FOX has 14 games over about 20 days in October.

24 could be ran in the fall with 24 episodes, if they wanted. Wy not have a few 2 hour blocks of 24 to make it work. A 2 hour sunday premiere followed by a 2 hour Monday night premiere and then have a 2 hour fall season finale. Thats 6 hours taken care of in just 3 nights (out of about 13-15 weeks. Run a few Monday Night Doubleheaders and you have yourself a full season of 24 in the fall.

Then, what you do is have a great cliffhanger that pushes a storyline in to a real time NEXT DAY for the spring season. So it would be, in a sence, 48 hours.

Speaking of LOST's ratings, shouldn't we have the live+7 ratings for its premiere episode now? I read that they should have been available yesterday...

quote:

Originally posted by mushu_jj:

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce:

quote:

Originally posted by AL:

quote:

Originally posted by TV-aholic:
Is that just 63 games in the CHICAGO Market?

Superstation WGN is a different feed than WNG Chicago.
Her in Indy, and anywhere else outside of Chi-town, you can watch Air-Bud to night (Friday 02/22) on WGN, not Smackdown.

I wonder if some cubs games are broadcast on the "Superstation" that are not aired locally in Chicago?

quote:

Originally posted by T Dog:
In fact, just today (or actually yesterday) there was a Tribune article stating that the Cubs are moving more games to cable and are only televising 63 games this year, a record low. Why? Because their rights fees are higher on cable than on WGN, and of course - so it won't conflict with CW programming. With the poor ratings CW has, you'd think WGN would try to air more games, which would defiantly get higher ratings. But baseball skews older (even with the Cubs), and it probably wouldn't make financial sense for WGN or the Cubs.

I think that all of the games that the Cubs broadcast on WGN are aired nationally on the Superstation and locally in Chicago. I know they have a separate national feed of WGN from the local channel in Chicago, but I don't think they have any games locally that are not covered nationally or vice versa.

Righto. And Tribune writer made a point of saying how his emails reflect dismay from out of town Cub fans who are disturbed about these continuing reductions.

I knew they were going down, but this cut to 63 represents a cut in half from just 10 years ago.

If I recall, any games not aired on the WGN feeds airs on Comcast so at least with cable most people in the Chicagoland area can see them.

Right again and the column mentioned the disaffection of Chicagoans without cable in addition to the out-of-towners disaffected.

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce:

quote:

Originally posted by AL:
I think that all of the games that the Cubs broadcast on WGN are aired nationally on the Superstation and locally in Chicago. I know they have a separate national feed of WGN from the local channel in Chicago, but I don't think they have any games locally that are not covered nationally or vice versa.

Right,Al. And Tribune writer made a point of saying how his emails reflect dismay from out of town Cub fans who are disturbed about these continuing reductions.

I knew they were going down, but this cut to 63 represents a cut in half from just 10 years ago.

I think part of the reduction is MLB getting tough on the "Superstations" TBS has already backedoff alot on the Braves telecasts in recent seasons. So don't completely blame either WGN or the Cubs for the reduction.

quote:

Originally posted by Chimera:
Speaking of LOST's ratings, shouldn't we have the live+7 ratings for its premiere episode now? I read that they should have been available yesterday...

Have not yet seen the list yet for the week ending Februay 3rd.

As soon as I do, Ill try to remember to post them for you.

quote:

Originally posted by TV-aholic:

quote:

Originally posted by Chimera:
Speaking of LOST's ratings, shouldn't we have the live+7 ratings for its premiere episode now? I read that they should have been available yesterday...

Have not yet seen the list yet for the week ending Februay 3rd.

As soon as I do, Ill try to remember to post them for you.

Thanks