Originally posted by TV-aholic: What, they should schedule 4 more episodes in December, then only have new episodes for February and May ONLY???
quote:
Originally posted by robert: So VD enters in its hiatus exactly when the Twilight craze is at its peak. Really smart move
Well that's what they're doing with GG and OTH. But they could've had a 2-3 weeks break at the end of october. I mean the realease date for New Moon wasn't a secret. They could've made a better scheduling
Overall ratings may not be thriving, but more wealthy people are watching the major networks this season. So far, 11% more upscale viewers are tuning in to the Big Four, a figure propelled by a huge jump at Fox.
Among 18-to-49 viewers in $100,000-plus homes, rating points are a combined 14.7 compared to a 13.2 last year, according to one measure. That comes as overall ratings for the Big Four are flat at an estimated 12.5, marking a silver lining for networks.
Figures are derived from "live plus seven day" program ratings and do not include specials programming.
The upscale increase comes mostly via Fox, which is up 56% this season to a 3.9 versus a 2.5 last year, with help from new show "Glee."
On the backs of comedies such as "The Office" and football, beleaguered NBC has an upscale spin to take to advertisers -- with ratings up 12.5% from a 3.2 to a 3.6. ABC and CBS are down 5% and 3% -- to a 3.8 and 3.4, respectively.
But each network has a higher concentration of affluent viewers, coveted by advertisers seeking their disposable income.
ABC has posted a 115 index among 18-to-49 viewers in $100,000-plus homes. That means its concentration is 15% higher than what would be found in the general population. For ABC, that's up from a 113 a year ago, and keeps it at the top in the index area.
NBC, which for years dominated the competition in upscale viewers, has a 113 index this year -- up from 112 last fall. Series such as "30 Rock" and "Community" are helping drive up the figure, along with the "The Office."
CBS is also up slightly, to a 102 from a 101. "60 Minutes" is a strong performer. Top shows "CSI:" and "CSI: NY" have indexes below 100, hurting the network-wide figure.
Fox has soared, with its index going from an 88 -- 12% below an average concentration -- to a 106. In addition to "Glee's" high percentage of upscale viewers, the three hours a week of "So You Think You Can Dance" -- which was not on last fall's schedule -- is a contributor.
Although an index only refers to a percentage and not actual viewers, some view it as the most insightful benchmark for upscale performance, partly because an advertiser can receive more affluent viewers per rating point purchased.
There may be a simple reason for the increases. A large percentage of upscale viewers may have DVRs that allow them to watch more TV. Cable news competition is losing appeal, which may be another reason.
Still, the demo may be eager ad-skippers, and "commercial ratings" -- the market currency -- may be down.
Among individual shows this season, ABC's "Grey's Anatomy" has the highest ratings in the upscale demo, while "Glee" has the highest index at 146.
You won't find this on my résumé, but 12 years ago, I worked for three long months at King World, home of Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy and The Oprah Winfrey Show (among others). I won't bore you with the details (it was not fun), but I do recall sitting in a meeting where a bevy of overpaid execs were ecstatic that Oprah was not stepping down from her top-rated podium. "Whew! No need to worry about our stock options now," laughed the head of the division. "We got her for two more years."
Now, after talking about leaving her top-rated syndicated talk show for the past 12 years, she will finally do so in 2011. Personally, all I can say is, good riddance. Don't get me wrong, I recognize Oprah's impact. Everything she touches turns to gold. But I am just plain sick and tired of hearing about her departure. Aren't you? And I know damn well—as you should, too—that she is not "retiring." There is no way that the egomaniac of the century is walking away from her daily exposure. She feeds from this. She lives by this. And she is not walking away. It ain't gonna happen.
My guess is Oprah will plop herself smack in the middle of OWN, the cable network she's creating in conjunction with Discovery Communications. And that, no doubt, will give the cable net a shot in the ratings arm. But what Oprah apparently does not know is that the cable platform is not daytime syndication, and there is no reason to believe she will attract an audience of the same magnitude. It's much easier to tune into Oprah on channel 7 in your local market from force of habit than find her on one of the higher channels.
Looking into my crystal ball, I can already see the headlines in 2012 or 2013 about Oprah's amazing return to daytime syndication, once she realizes her impact has diminished on cable. Just wait. You'll see.
As I always have said, there is only one Oprah. You can't duplicate her. And chances are Sony Pictures Television's Dr. Oz, who owes his success to Oprah, will inherit a large percentage of the Oprah time periods. But September 2011 is almost two years away. And for 20 long months, all we will be hearing about is Oprah departure. Personally, I can't stand it. Can you? -Marc Berman
Originally posted by Marc Berman: As I always have said, there is only one Oprah. You can't duplicate her. And chances are Sony Pictures Television's Dr. Oz, who owes his success to Oprah, will inherit a large percentage of the Oprah time periods. But September 2011 is almost two years away. And for 20 long months, all we will be hearing about is Oprah departure. Personally, I can't stand it. Can you? -Marc Berman
I could see Nate Berkus getting a show from Oprah (as its been talked about) and he may get most of her time periods. But as of now, yes, I agree that Dr. Oz will get most of her time periods.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: yankeesrj12,
VOTE IN THE PIF NETWORK GAME: http://pifeedback.com/eve/foru...93910104/m/764101382 TONIGHT: ---> NEW <--- EPISODES OF HIGH SCHOOL SUPERSTARS!, GETTING SOME, AND THE FINALE OF KILLER ISLAND! PLUS: MILLION DOLLAR GIVEAWAY, GATED COMMUNITY, ROSIE, LIFE HAPPENS, AND FALLING WITH STYLE!
'New Moon' takes opening day record Makes $72.7 million, beating 'Dark Knight'}}
quote:
Summit Entertainment’s “The Twilight Saga: New Moon” tore up the box office record for best opening day, grabbing the title away from Warner Bros. “The Dark Knight,” and earning a spectacular $72.7 million yesterday at 4,024 theaters.
An exceptional feat for a film playing outside the summer frame. “Dark Knight” had minted $67.2 million from 4,366 runs on July 18, 2008 before
Fueling the Friday B.O. for “New Moon” were midnight shows in 3,514 venues which drew in a record-breaking $26.3 million for the time slot.
The opening day for “New Moon” posted a 100% gain over the first Friday of “Twilight” which made $36 million a year ago before posting a $69.6 million.
Dr. Oz will probably get the spot but I would like it if Nate Berkus got it. I find him a lot easier to watch.
quote:
Originally posted by yankeesrj12:
I could see Nate Berkus getting a show from Oprah (as its been talked about) and he may get most of her time periods. But as of now, yes, I agree that Dr. Oz will get most of her time periods.
From the articles being printed, it's been mentined that Oprah wants to debut OWN at the same level of cable performance as some of the larger cable networks. For that to happen, she'd have to be on camera a lot. Some of her shows in development are solid but I don't think they'll strong enough to even challenge Lifetime by itself without the Oprah on camera appearances.
quote:
Originally posted by Marc Berman:
My guess is Oprah will plop herself smack in the middle of OWN, the cable network she's creating in conjunction with Discovery Communications.
Originally posted by lopez: 'New Moon' takes opening day record Makes $72.7 million, beating 'Dark Knight'}}
quote:
Summit Entertainment’s “The Twilight Saga: New Moon” tore up the box office record for best opening day, grabbing the title away from Warner Bros. “The Dark Knight,” and earning a spectacular $72.7 million yesterday at 4,024 theaters.
An exceptional feat for a film playing outside the summer frame. “Dark Knight” had minted $67.2 million from 4,366 runs on July 18, 2008 before
Fueling the Friday B.O. for “New Moon” were midnight shows in 3,514 venues which drew in a record-breaking $26.3 million for the time slot.
The opening day for “New Moon” posted a 100% gain over the first Friday of “Twilight” which made $36 million a year ago before posting a $69.6 million.
both spotupj and I posted in the Primetime Sked thread that we were going to stop watching, and look what happened to the ratings
Really, just joking
quote:
Originally posted by WlcmZapataTexas: I have to wonder how much longer ABC will keep Flash Forward on Thursdays. It's falling every week and by March will be around a 2.0 demo if the track record holds. This show needs to be moved.
quote:
Originally posted by Marc Berman: which works well no matter where it is positioned, followed by ABC’s FlashForward (Viewers: #3, 8.01 million; A18-49: #3, 2.4/ 7),
Posts: 2852 | Location: Western Pennsylvania | Registered: 13 December 2006
Originally posted by MattyBoy: the mentalist is the nights top show in viewers. just imagine what it could be getting if it were earlier in the night. its so much better than CSI
People are forgetting that The Office and Grey's Anatomy are Demo powerhouses and The Mentalist would be crushed in the demo but also there is no guarantee that The Mentalist with no real competition at 10 now could survive against Grey's Anatomy. CSI and Grey's Anatomy take a lot of viewers away from each other. My guess is tones of CSI viewers would go to GA. But the most important thing is the 18-49 where The Mentalist would just crumble and collapse completely.
Largely agree, I don't know about crumble. It is being heavily dvr'd at 10pm, but the same thing would be true at 9pm, a wash there, and the real question about TM is how attached its aud is to it in the face of the competition you mentioned. And as declining as CSI is, I sense it still has more attached fans than TM. It could be argued TM has not had time to develop such attachments, only raising the question as to why it was moved and why the net is banking so heavily on this show.
Posts: 2852 | Location: Western Pennsylvania | Registered: 13 December 2006
Originally posted by galveston: I could have told you at the beginning that Flash Forward would be a one hit wonder, if that. After the gimmick of everyone losing consciousness at once, what do you do for a follow up once its explained?
The show quickly became mundane. This massive event happens that should have shaken the world to its foundations, and we're supposed to become riveted by the intruige of whether a wife cheats on her husband, an alcoholic goes back to the bottle, and an FBI agent might actually get killed?
Posts: 2852 | Location: Western Pennsylvania | Registered: 13 December 2006
Originally posted by heighteye: I think that the problem with this season's "Fringe" is that they keep using eps. to "set up" another episode, but there never seems to be the big reveal moment. We all thought when we tuned in ep. 1 this season (well, I did anyway!) that we'd learn more about that alternate universe where the Twin Towers still stood, and Leonard Nimoy hung out, etc. etc. But no, we kept getting setups for that ep. (and apparently giving the actor who played Charlie a plausible exit from the show). And when it was finally shown, it didn't tell us that much new. It seems to me it can't decide whether to be a serial or a standalone, and it ends up being neither.
And now it seems to be descending into self-parody. Ah well, sooner or later we all do. You, me, Maureen Dowd, even Ryan Seacrest. ;-)
quote:
Originally posted by pisher (about "Fringe):
It is a much less entertaining show this season, in the most competitive timeslot in all of television. I don't care about the ratings--my worry was that it would run too long, and turn into a mockery of itself, and sadly, it already has.
BETTER ep last night, but I still couldn't tear myself away from The Office. Recyclops!
Bottom line: the only difference for Fringe this season, compared to last, is this new crappy time slot, which I suspected would be the case when FOX announced this move back in mid-May. This is the real reason this show's Live ratings have fallen so greatly.
The idea that the show has somehow lost its way is a cop out. It still has its core fan base of about 8-10 million (e.g. its big DVR audience) and it still is of good quality. Now, if only it can move to a better night and time so advertisers can pay more of a premium for its ads on the show with more Live viewers.
I'll largely agree with Douglas but from a different angle. From what I have seen of this year, it has the same problems and no greater ones that it had last year. I don't see a material change in the content of the show. It got caught between a procedural and a serial last year, and the same thing is happening this year. It was hokey at times last year, same this year. It held out great promise at times last year, and promise continues to be held out, but with strong doubts on my part as to whether this show can get its act together.
Posts: 2852 | Location: Western Pennsylvania | Registered: 13 December 2006
Originally posted by robert: So VD enters in its hiatus exactly when the Twilight craze is at its peak. Really smart move
I don't think it makes much difference either way, frankly--the timing of the hiatus, I mean.
Twilight obviously is the primary reason VD did so well--hell, it's the reason VD got greenlit. They are not, however, competing--not until there's a Twilight TV series. VD wouldn't lose first-run viewers to New Moon, and New Moon may get some new viewers for VD--who being new viewers, would have no problem with repeats. It's like Twilight is the shark, and VD is the remora. I guess that's why it sucks so much.
Originally posted by Marc Berman: My take on the whole Oprah announcement:
You won't find this on my résumé, but 12 years ago, I worked for three long months at King World, home of Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy and The Oprah Winfrey Show (among others). I won't bore you with the details (it was not fun), but I do recall sitting in a meeting where a bevy of overpaid execs were ecstatic that Oprah was not stepping down from her top-rated podium. "Whew! No need to worry about our stock options now," laughed the head of the division. "We got her for two more years."
Now, after talking about leaving her top-rated syndicated talk show for the past 12 years, she will finally do so in 2011. Personally, all I can say is, good riddance. Don't get me wrong, I recognize Oprah's impact. Everything she touches turns to gold. But I am just plain sick and tired of hearing about her departure. Aren't you? And I know damn well—as you should, too—that she is not "retiring." There is no way that the egomaniac of the century is walking away from her daily exposure. She feeds from this. She lives by this. And she is not walking away. It ain't gonna happen.
My guess is Oprah will plop herself smack in the middle of OWN, the cable network she's creating in conjunction with Discovery Communications. And that, no doubt, will give the cable net a shot in the ratings arm. But what Oprah apparently does not know is that the cable platform is not daytime syndication, and there is no reason to believe she will attract an audience of the same magnitude. It's much easier to tune into Oprah on channel 7 in your local market from force of habit than find her on one of the higher channels.
Looking into my crystal ball, I can already see the headlines in 2012 or 2013 about Oprah's amazing return to daytime syndication, once she realizes her impact has diminished on cable. Just wait. You'll see.
As I always have said, there is only one Oprah. You can't duplicate her. And chances are Sony Pictures Television's Dr. Oz, who owes his success to Oprah, will inherit a large percentage of the Oprah time periods. But September 2011 is almost two years away. And for 20 long months, all we will be hearing about is Oprah departure. Personally, I can't stand it. Can you? -Marc Berman
Overall ratings may not be thriving, but more wealthy people are watching the major networks this season. So far, 11% more upscale viewers are tuning in to the Big Four, a figure propelled by a huge jump at Fox.
Among 18-to-49 viewers in $100,000-plus homes, rating points are a combined 14.7 compared to a 13.2 last year, according to one measure. That comes as overall ratings for the Big Four are flat at an estimated 12.5, marking a silver lining for networks.
Figures are derived from "live plus seven day" program ratings and do not include specials programming.
The upscale increase comes mostly via Fox, which is up 56% this season to a 3.9 versus a 2.5 last year, with help from new show "Glee."
On the backs of comedies such as "The Office" and football, beleaguered NBC has an upscale spin to take to advertisers -- with ratings up 12.5% from a 3.2 to a 3.6. ABC and CBS are down 5% and 3% -- to a 3.8 and 3.4, respectively.
But each network has a higher concentration of affluent viewers, coveted by advertisers seeking their disposable income.
ABC has posted a 115 index among 18-to-49 viewers in $100,000-plus homes. That means its concentration is 15% higher than what would be found in the general population. For ABC, that's up from a 113 a year ago, and keeps it at the top in the index area.
NBC, which for years dominated the competition in upscale viewers, has a 113 index this year -- up from 112 last fall. Series such as "30 Rock" and "Community" are helping drive up the figure, along with the "The Office."
CBS is also up slightly, to a 102 from a 101. "60 Minutes" is a strong performer. Top shows "CSI:" and "CSI: NY" have indexes below 100, hurting the network-wide figure.
Fox has soared, with its index going from an 88 -- 12% below an average concentration -- to a 106. In addition to "Glee's" high percentage of upscale viewers, the three hours a week of "So You Think You Can Dance" -- which was not on last fall's schedule -- is a contributor.
Although an index only refers to a percentage and not actual viewers, some view it as the most insightful benchmark for upscale performance, partly because an advertiser can receive more affluent viewers per rating point purchased.
There may be a simple reason for the increases. A large percentage of upscale viewers may have DVRs that allow them to watch more TV. Cable news competition is losing appeal, which may be another reason.
Still, the demo may be eager ad-skippers, and "commercial ratings" -- the market currency -- may be down.
Among individual shows this season, ABC's "Grey's Anatomy" has the highest ratings in the upscale demo, while "Glee" has the highest index at 146.
Highest-Rated Upscale Series
"Grey's Anatomy" (9.5), ABC
"House" (7.8), Fox
"The Office" (7.6), NBC
"Sunday Night Football" (7.5), NBC
"Big Bang Theory" (7.2), CBS
"Desperate Housewives" (6.7), ABC
"Private Practice" (6.2), ABC
"Glee" (6.0), Fox
Two and a Half Men" (5.9), CBS
"30 Rock" (5.4), NBC
Upscale Series with Highest Indexes
"Glee" (146), Fox
"30 Rock" (142), NBC
"The Office" (139), NBC
"Community" (131), NBC
"60 Minutes" (129), CBS
"Grey's Anatomy" (129), ABC
"Brothers & Sisters" (127), ABC
"Private Practice" (126), ABC
"How I Met Your Mother" (124), CBS
"Parks & Recreation" (122), NBC
That's interesting. I suppose this is a big factor why NBC gave Community and Parks and Recreations full season pickups despite the lackluster ratings so far.
For anyone who continuous moans about CBS needing to move 60 Minutes and why its a "winner" with bad demos, this is why and this is why CBS will never ever move it.
Amazing first day box office total.
