Originally posted by Zitrone: But you are basing all this on a couple of weeks for A18-49, and just after the CW spent more on the mid-season return of GG than it ever did for Reaper.
You keep complaining about how much money was spent on GG (I'm still waiting for anyone to give a number on that. I didn't see one off-network ad, so everything I saw was media generated 'free' advertising due to the 'controversy'). In any case, the money has been spent. It makes no sense to claim that CW should ignore the superior ratings becasue they 'bought them'. When it comes time for renewing shows for next year, how much was spent last year is almost irrelevant. All that matters is what viewer/demo/advertising income is projected for next year.
Finally! Someone who understands that this is, after all, show business. Thank you, Obveeus, for stating the obvious.
Posts: 82 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: 25 February 2008
Originally posted by Zitrone: But you are basing all this on a couple of weeks for A18-49, and just after the CW spent more on the mid-season return of GG than it ever did for Reaper.
You keep complaining about how much money was spent on GG (I'm still waiting for anyone to give a number on that. I didn't see one off-network ad, so everything I saw was media generated 'free' advertising due to the 'controversy'). In any case, the money has been spent. It makes no sense to claim that CW should ignore the superior ratings becasue they 'bought them'. When it comes time for renewing shows for next year, how much was spent last year is almost irrelevant. All that matters is what viewer/demo/advertising income is projected for next year.
Finally! Someone who understands that this is, after all, show business. Thank you, Obveeus, for stating the obvious.
What? All I said is that CW choices were terrible for the 'business' part, how is that not stating the obvious? The CW put all their eggs in GG basket, and it didn't deliver. Renewing GG had obviously nothing to do with profitability requirements, since it was renewed before it even came back on the air, after going below 1.0 demo in Fall.
Meanwhile they wasted money on promoting GG exclusively, and slaughtered all their comedies (including EHC that did just as well as GG on Monday) just to increase the ratings of that one show.
So please explain to me the commercial genius behind CW decision to promote GG and GG only at the expense of all their other new shows.
To repeat it once again: on the year GG does not have better A18-49 ratings than either Reaper or EHC (on Monday slot). We will see next Fall how much advertisers are willing to pay for the OMG buzz, tween crowd and lousy ratings, but I bet it won't be much.
Posts: 634 | Location: NYC | Registered: 02 November 2007
Originally posted by no longer bored used to be striker: WMC has not yet proven that keeping it on the air will generate a nickle down the line.
The one thing WMC has going for itself vs. Eli Stone and the other 'soaps' is that WMC has more repeat value. ABC is very short on programs that can repeat well, so that may be the edge that WMC needs.
WMC only seems to repeat well because it rates so poorly on original airings.
We actually have no sense of the repeat value for this show. It has only aired three repeats and those aired on Saturday's at 10pm in December. It has never aired a repeat in it's regular Friday slot. For all we know it repeats poorly.
Originally posted by total eclipse: Shall we all say it together? Bye-bye WMC. We won't miss ya one bit!
I'm shocked that SVU didn't post higher than 12 mil. After all, Robin Williams is still a household name (even if I personally can't stand him!). Despite of his appearance, it was an excellent ep, with wonderful performances by Chris Meloni and the departing Diane Neal.
You're very objective.
So you think that a show like Moonlight should survive although it's getting 7-8 million viewers and a show like WMC that it's getting 8-9 million should be canceled. And let's not forget Moonlight airs sandwiched between two 10 million shows
You're not crowned the king of spins 2008. Check out the demos. 1.9 for WMC, in the middle of the week. Pretty lame, I'd say. And once again, you're taking things out of context. WMC is measured against BL (which spot it's occupying). As someone else already noted, WMC's performance pretty much guaranteed BL's return. Not to mention Moonlight airs Friday, WMC's numbers were for Tuesday. Apples and oranges. But spin it as much as you like. WMC failed last night, and pretty miserably.
Read carefully what i write. I'm not comparing yesterday's result. I'm comparing what those two shows have done on Fridays. As far as i know ABC has nothing on Fridays so there are plenty of slots for WMC. And please don't compare WMC's numbers with Moonlight's numbers on fridays beacause Moonlight loses on every level. WMC has soundly beaten Moonlight in viewers and it has done similar numbers in demos although WMC does not have a 10 million lead-in. I understand why you're promoting the cancelation of WMC. You hope Moonlight won't be beaten if it returns next year.
Get your facts straight. WMC has been beaten by Moonlight consistently - and exactly where it hurts, in the demos. Check out this link: WMC's performance See the awful demos? and the fact is, WMC never even topped ABC's ranking for the night, it's just that much of a loser! Your hatred for Moonlight blinds you. I, however, am not a fan of Reaper, for example, nor am I a fan of BL (in fact, I am know to despise the show). But I can objectively rule that both shows merit renewal in the specific context they're discussed.
Oh i hate Moonlight and I have 20/20 vision.
And that comes from a guy that used to like Buffy. I loved Buffy and Angel but Moonlight is an awesome show and it has a lot of potential by showing the 2 lead vampires pevious lifes as vampires. Tell me how the hell can you hate Moonlight but love Buffy. It does not make sense at all
Um well Buffy was hot and i dont like guys so you do the math.
Well that is just the most stupid and childish comment i have seen in along time. So you tell me you don't like Moonlight because of a guy vampire show. Let me ask you this did you hate Angel also on the show then? And what about the show Angel?
You know what stop trying to make everybody like moonlight. If we dont like it we dont like it enough said.
Originally posted by Twins12: Moonlight has to be setting a record for the most comments about a marginal show. Not even Friday, yet. Wait until Saturday's forum.
Ugh to think we're wasting time talking about some piece of slop that won't last past season two, if it even gets season two. Wait, are we talking about Veronica Mars again?
Originally posted by total eclipse: Shall we all say it together? Bye-bye WMC. We won't miss ya one bit!
I'm shocked that SVU didn't post higher than 12 mil. After all, Robin Williams is still a household name (even if I personally can't stand him!). Despite of his appearance, it was an excellent ep, with wonderful performances by Chris Meloni and the departing Diane Neal.
You're very objective.
So you think that a show like Moonlight should survive although it's getting 7-8 million viewers and a show like WMC that it's getting 8-9 million should be canceled. And let's not forget Moonlight airs sandwiched between two 10 million shows
You're not crowned the king of spins 2008. Check out the demos. 1.9 for WMC, in the middle of the week. Pretty lame, I'd say. And once again, you're taking things out of context. WMC is measured against BL (which spot it's occupying). As someone else already noted, WMC's performance pretty much guaranteed BL's return. Not to mention Moonlight airs Friday, WMC's numbers were for Tuesday. Apples and oranges. But spin it as much as you like. WMC failed last night, and pretty miserably.
Read carefully what i write. I'm not comparing yesterday's result. I'm comparing what those two shows have done on Fridays. As far as i know ABC has nothing on Fridays so there are plenty of slots for WMC. And please don't compare WMC's numbers with Moonlight's numbers on fridays beacause Moonlight loses on every level. WMC has soundly beaten Moonlight in viewers and it has done similar numbers in demos although WMC does not have a 10 million lead-in. I understand why you're promoting the cancelation of WMC. You hope Moonlight won't be beaten if it returns next year.
Get your facts straight. WMC has been beaten by Moonlight consistently - and exactly where it hurts, in the demos. Check out this link: WMC's performance See the awful demos? and the fact is, WMC never even topped ABC's ranking for the night, it's just that much of a loser! Your hatred for Moonlight blinds you. I, however, am not a fan of Reaper, for example, nor am I a fan of BL (in fact, I am know to despise the show). But I can objectively rule that both shows merit renewal in the specific context they're discussed.
Oh i hate Moonlight and I have 20/20 vision.
And that comes from a guy that used to like Buffy. I loved Buffy and Angel but Moonlight is an awesome show and it has a lot of potential by showing the 2 lead vampires pevious lifes as vampires. Tell me how the hell can you hate Moonlight but love Buffy. It does not make sense at all
Um well Buffy was hot and i dont like guys so you do the math.
Well that is just the most stupid and childish comment i have seen in along time. So you tell me you don't like Moonlight because of a guy vampire show. Let me ask you this did you hate Angel also on the show then? And what about the show Angel?
You know what stop trying to make everybody like moonlight. If we dont like it we dont like it enough said.
So did you also hate Angel because he is a guy vampire?
Originally posted by Zitrone: But you are basing all this on a couple of weeks for A18-49, and just after the CW spent more on the mid-season return of GG than it ever did for Reaper.
You keep complaining about how much money was spent on GG (I'm still waiting for anyone to give a number on that. I didn't see one off-network ad, so everything I saw was media generated 'free' advertising due to the 'controversy'). In any case, the money has been spent. It makes no sense to claim that CW should ignore the superior ratings becasue they 'bought them'. When it comes time for renewing shows for next year, how much was spent last year is almost irrelevant. All that matters is what viewer/demo/advertising income is projected for next year.
Finally! Someone who understands that this is, after all, show business. Thank you, Obveeus, for stating the obvious.
What? All I said is that CW choices were terrible for the 'business' part, how is that not stating the obvious? The CW put all their eggs in GG basket, and it didn't deliver. Renewing GG had obviously nothing to do with profitability requirements, since it was renewed before it even came back on the air, after going below 1.0 demo in Fall.
Meanwhile they wasted money on promoting GG exclusively, and slaughtered all their comedies (including EHC that did just as well as GG on Monday) just to increase the ratings of that one show.
So please explain to me the commercial genius behind CW decision to promote GG and GG only at the expense of all their other new shows.
To repeat it once again: on the year GG does not have better A18-49 ratings than either Reaper or EHC (on Monday slot). We will see next Fall how much advertisers are willing to pay for the OMG buzz, tween crowd and lousy ratings, but I bet it won't be much.
EHC, when it was on Mondays, never got above a 1.0 in A18-49 and frequently scored well below that, even in originals. Gossip Girl, since its return--even though it's only been two weeks--has pulled a 1.3. The CW's core demo and the one it sells against isn't A18-49, it's A18-34 and GG does in the 2's there.
They did not waste money promoting GG exclusively or to the exclusion of its other shows. GG totally has the potential to become The Brand for The CW. The other shows got their shot in the fall and they failed.
More importantly, without a whole range of information, none of which any of us here have any access to, it's simply not possible to judge the profitability of a program. Production costs are meaningless, since the network pays a license fee to the studio in exchange for a set number of airings, generally the original and 1 or 2 repeats. The network gets to keep the proceeds of any commercial time it is able to sell within the airings of the show but any ancillary revenue--DVD sales, iTunes and other distribution, including eventual syndication--generally belongs to the producing studio, which is how they make up for the deficits incurred.
This is a way simplistic explanation, but will have to do for this forum. The CW is unique among the networks in that it exists purely as a distribution service because it is not attached to a studio the way the other 4 networks are.
Posts: 82 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: 25 February 2008
Originally posted by Zitrone: But you are basing all this on a couple of weeks for A18-49, and just after the CW spent more on the mid-season return of GG than it ever did for Reaper.
You keep complaining about how much money was spent on GG (I'm still waiting for anyone to give a number on that. I didn't see one off-network ad, so everything I saw was media generated 'free' advertising due to the 'controversy'). In any case, the money has been spent. It makes no sense to claim that CW should ignore the superior ratings becasue they 'bought them'. When it comes time for renewing shows for next year, how much was spent last year is almost irrelevant. All that matters is what viewer/demo/advertising income is projected for next year.
I have actually seen ads for GG on other networks; ABC, MTV, and the N network. So, they are showing them off network.
Originally posted by Zitrone: But you are basing all this on a couple of weeks for A18-49, and just after the CW spent more on the mid-season return of GG than it ever did for Reaper.
You keep complaining about how much money was spent on GG (I'm still waiting for anyone to give a number on that. I didn't see one off-network ad, so everything I saw was media generated 'free' advertising due to the 'controversy'). In any case, the money has been spent. It makes no sense to claim that CW should ignore the superior ratings becasue they 'bought them'. When it comes time for renewing shows for next year, how much was spent last year is almost irrelevant. All that matters is what viewer/demo/advertising income is projected for next year.
I have actually seen ads for GG on other networks; ABC, MTV, and the N network. So, they are showing them off network.
Peace!
Since Viacom owns MTV and The N and has a 50% stake in The CW, there was most likely some sort of co-op promotion deal at work there. I can't imagine that ABC ran promos for The CW, unless it was ABC Family--the cable arm of ABC. And even then it would not have had any 'geography' in the spots, not even Monday night. Something like "Check local listings".
Posts: 82 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: 25 February 2008
Originally posted by Native NYer: EHC, when it was on Mondays, never got above a 1.0 in A18-49 and frequently scored well below that, even in originals. Gossip Girl, since its return--even though it's only been two weeks--has pulled a 1.3.
Frequently well below 1.0 in originals? Here is the data:
quote:
[code] Week Viewers Demo ---------------------------------------------- 10/01/07 2.58 M 1.0 10/08/07 2.60 M 1.1 10/15/07 2.61 M 1.1 10/22/07 2.52 M 1.0 10/29/07 2.44 M 1.0 11/05/07 2.45 M 1.0 11/12/07 2.32 M 1.0 11/19/07 2.16 M 0.8 11/26/07 2.26 M 0.9 12/10/07 2.08 M 0.9
Enough said, with zero promotion cost.
quote:
They did not waste money promoting GG exclusively or to the exclusion of its other shows.
They did not only waste money, they wasted other established performers like EHC, or new promising series like Reaper or AiA, all sacrificed on the "GG>All" strategy.
quote:
GG totally has the potential to become The Brand for The CW.
It started at 3.5m viewers and 1.6 demo with the best lead-in CW had to offer, what potential is there really left? Unless the brand of CW is to be over-hyped failures like GG or 90210 next year.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Zitrone,
Posts: 634 | Location: NYC | Registered: 02 November 2007
Is there anyway we can ban Walter from this forum ? I'm all for freedom expressing opnions and I too am guilty of getting paranoid at times but this guy has taken being rude to an all new level . I understand he hates Moonlight and have no issues with that but his posts are always arguementive and disrespectful.
Originally posted by Pam: Is there anyway we can ban Walter from this forum ? I'm all for freedom expressing opnions and I too am guilty of getting paranoid at times but this guy has taken being rude to an all new level . I understand he hates Moonlight and have no issues with that but his posts are always arguementive and disrespectful.
Nevermind ML, but I think all people who drop massive quotes-block only to post a one-liner, or who signs their post by their name, should get a temporary ban.
Posts: 634 | Location: NYC | Registered: 02 November 2007
Originally posted by Pam: Is there anyway we can ban Walter from this forum ? I'm all for freedom expressing opnions and I too am guilty of getting paranoid at times but this guy has taken being rude to an all new level . I understand he hates Moonlight and have no issues with that but his posts are always arguementive and disrespectful.
Nevermind ML, but I think all people who drop massive quotes-block only to post a one-liner, or who signs their post by their name, should get a temporary ban.
Originally posted by Pam: Is there anyway we can ban Walter from this forum ? I'm all for freedom expressing opnions and I too am guilty of getting paranoid at times but this guy has taken being rude to an all new level . I understand he hates Moonlight and have no issues with that but his posts are always arguementive and disrespectful.
Nevermind ML, but I think all people who drop massive quotes-block only to post a one-liner, or who signs their post by their name, should get a temporary ban.
LOL !! Makes no difference to me ;-)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Posts: 414 | Location: Los Angeles, CA | Registered: 01 December 2006
