ABC's scheduling makes no sense to me. It will be off next week when PP and DSM are new and then air on the 12th when both shows are repeats?!
Not ABC's fault. PD wrapped production of their last episode (the one currently scheduled to air on the 12th) on Monday. Meaning they finished shooting it. No way in heck would that thing be turned around in 9 days (with all the music and VFX work) to air. The "normal" baseline is a 25 day post-production turnaround. This episode of PD will have 16.
Posts: 3554 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: 21 September 2006
Now this is vlis-worthy spin! Taking things completely out of context. If DSM were in Big Shots slot and retained 70% of the lead in like it is now, it would be the best thing to air after Greys yet.
That is one huge "if"... the best retention anything has had post-Grey's is October Road's series premiere and that was hovering around 60-65% max.
Posts: 3554 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: 21 September 2006
Now this is vlis-worthy spin! Taking things completely out of context. If DSM were in Big Shots slot and retained 70% of the lead in like it is now, it would be the best thing to air after Greys yet.
That is one huge "if"... the best retention anything has had post-Grey's is October Road's series premiere and that was hovering around 60-65% max.
which is why they should move OR back to the post-GA spot. OR is going to do bad after Notes those 2 shows don't work well together.
Originally posted by pisher: Right, because you NEVER do that. Only people you disagree with do that.
What? Personal attack, or spin? Yeah, I spin. We all spin. The threads wouldn't have double-digit numbers of pages most days if there wasn't spin. I just think your spin has particularly big blind spots.
quote:
Because that's all there was to pay attention to. People kept saying "PD could do really great with a strong lead-in", and then it got one, and it didn't even do as well as the second episode, and held onto slightly over half the audience Mr. Grinch so generously handed it.
And honestly, this would happen with any strong lead-in they gave PD. I always said this would happen, and now it has, and I'm sure we all admire your gracious admission of that fact.
I said that it should've done better. I don't know whether that was "gracious" or not. I also noted that it's up 65% in the demo week-to-week.
quote:
Okay, but obviously what I post here is also allowed on this forum.
I agree?
quote:
So maybe you're just taking my criticisms of the show a bit too personally, and things spiral out of control from there.
Your impression is that this conversation has been "out of control"? I thought you liked this kind of thing.
quote:
Just accept that most people who know anything about ratings (including the huge number of people who know vastly more than me) would say this was a very poor performance.
The harshest thing said about PD on Zap2It, Media Life, and Futon combined is that ABC "dropped to second" in the hour. Those are the ones I check, but usually those are light on commentary, so feel free to point me to some others.
quote:
You wouldn't still be posting here if you had. So why even bring that up?
Because you did - you said "where you won't have to deal with ignorant trolls like Marc Berman and their opinionated uninformed rantings." If you weren't accusing me of saying or implying that, what in the WORLD were you talking about?
ABC's scheduling makes no sense to me. It will be off next week when PP and DSM are new and then air on the 12th when both shows are repeats?!
Not ABC's fault. PD wrapped production of their last episode (the one currently scheduled to air on the 12th) on Monday. Meaning they finished shooting it. No way in heck would that thing be turned around in 9 days (with all the music and VFX work) to air. The "normal" baseline is a 25 day post-production turnaround. This episode of PD will have 16.
That brings up my next question... why is it so far behind in production? Other drama shows are much further ahead than that(or finished their 9th episode weeks ago).
That brings up my next question... why is it so far behind in production? Other drama shows are much further ahead than that(or finished their 9th episode weeks ago).
It's a very production-intensive show, which is why the budget per-ep remains very high, in spite of the departure of Mr. Sonnenfeld. They have a certain look to maintain, and it takes a lot of time to accomplish that, and time is definitely money when you're talking TV production.
Originally posted by Obveeus: One thing that Pushing Daisies has going for it that most shows do not: the long term plot keeps moving forward.
The Nielsen numbers for last night reveal several things: 1. The half hour tuneout is bad. It really does show that a lot of people just don't 'get the show', for whatever reason. ABC has to be concerned about that and question how bad a season #2 numbers will get. 2. The dropoff from the lead-in was big, but given the special one time only nature of the lead-in, it can't be 'unexpected. ABC won't care about the dropoff from the lead-in last night. 3. The big increase in viewers for Pushing Daisies last night shows that this show could do much better with a lead-in than having to be a 'self starter'. ABC will look better upon Pushing Daisies for being the lead-off show on Wednesday and still finding an audience.
Completely agree with you on these fronts. The storyline has moved along very very well. I'm not too worried about the viewership right now. It will be interesting to see if there are new eps after the "cliffhanger" and how well they do.
Now this is vlis-worthy spin! Taking things completely out of context. If DSM were in Big Shots slot and retained 70% of the lead in like it is now, it would be the best thing to air after Greys yet.
That is one huge "if"... the best retention anything has had post-Grey's is October Road's series premiere and that was hovering around 60-65% max.
Even if it averaged 55% retention, it would be better and probably come close to beating the underperforming Without a Trace.
Pisher, I really don't care that you bash PD week after week, but my only question is why? Have you even watched a whole episode? I understand its not everyone's cup of tea. I despise the boring antics of crime shows like Cold Case and Without a Trace, but don't waste time bashing them every week.
What? Personal attack, or spin? Yeah, I spin. We all spin. The threads wouldn't have double-digit numbers of pages most days if there wasn't spin. I just think your spin has particularly big blind spots.
So that would also mean Marc's does as well. Okay, that's your opinion. Based on many years of experience in evaluating show ratings in a professional and objective manner, I'm sure.
quote:
I said that it should've done better.
Has there ever been a week you didn't think it SHOULD have done better? I guess that is one point of agreement between us, though of course I always think it should have done much worse.
quote:
I don't know whether that was "gracious" or not. I also noted that it's up 65% in the demo week-to-week.
Yes, but in this context, that SUCKS. And it's all about context, or lots of shows with better ratings than PD has ever gotten would never have been canceled.
quote:
Your impression is that this conversation has been "out of control"? I thought you liked this kind of thing.
Nobody can ever like things getting out of control? PD is definitely the show for you. For now.
quote:
The harshest thing said about PD on Zap2It, Media Life, and Futon combined is that ABC "dropped to second" in the hour.
What makes Marc's report so much more interesting than those is that he shares his experience from years of comparing the ratings of various shows. His winners, losers, and special mentions are personal (and informed) opinions, hardly infallible, but shared by many people in his business. Most of those people don't choose to share their opinions with us on a regular basis.
I don't see why you and others have to keep none-too-subtly slamming him for doing so. You wouldn't be doing so if he agreed with you--I disagree with him quite often, but I don't get so freaked out about it. I have to assume this is because you're afraid people in the entertainment biz might actually pay attention to his opinions. And some of them probably do, but he's not the reason PD is on thin ice right now. PD is the reason PD is on thin ice right now.
You do get he has no axe to grind with PD, right? He's just judging its performance like he would any other show. He's going out of his way to be nice, really.
quote:
Those are the ones I check, but usually those are light on commentary, so feel free to point me to some others.
Feel free to point me to one article about last night's ratings that says PD did really well, and that its ratings performance was a positive for its future survival.
quote:
Because you did - you said "where you won't have to deal with ignorant trolls like Marc Berman and their opinionated uninformed rantings."
You can't possibly be that humorless and literal.
Oh wait--PD fan--sorry--forgot.
quote:
If you weren't accusing me of saying or implying that, what in the WORLD were you talking about?
I was talking about how Marc is saying the same things I've been saying for weeks. So why freak when I say what is obvious to a professional journalist who specializes in TV ratings? Why not just accept that my opinions on PD's ratings performance are actually pretty mainstream, and that the show's chances of longterm survival don't look very rosy at the moment?
Because that's a fact. It could struggle on for a while, like other ratings-challenged shows, but the fact remains, it is a ratings-challenged show. If you could just accept this is the case, we could agree to differ about WHY this is the case.
Now was that really something you needed explained?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: pisher,
First, I was not at all surprised to see Shrek the Halls perform as well as it did. And it was actually pretty good. We watched it live and recorded it; my wife called this morning and said that my 4-year old is already on his third viewing.
Second, I love the resilience of Kitchen Nightmares. Something about Gordon Ramsey belittling people is appealing to me. (I think I live vicariously through him and Judge Judy.) I think that consistently drawing 7 million viewers for cheaply-made shows (HK and KM) should make Fox very happy. Gordon Ramsey is like the new John Walsh.
Finally, I watched Dirty Sexy Money for the second straight week last night. That show has vastly improved over the first couple of episodes. I think it would be a better show if a few characters disappeared.
Pisher, I really don't care that you bash PD week after week, but my only question is why?
Then I guess my question is why do you post what you post, which seems just about equally pointless to me. But nothing ever seems as pointless as asking somebody why they post their opinions on an internet forum, an activity that is inherently pointless.
Now this is vlis-worthy spin! Taking things completely out of context. If DSM were in Big Shots slot and retained 70% of the lead in like it is now, it would be the best thing to air after Greys yet.
That is one huge "if"... the best retention anything has had post-Grey's is October Road's series premiere and that was hovering around 60-65% max.
Even if it averaged 55% retention, it would be better and probably come close to beating the underperforming Without a Trace.
Because Marc just said PD looks increasingly unlikely to get a second season, and you can't very well call him a troll, since this is his forum?
quote:
It wins it's timeslot and has been picked up for the season. Nuff said, eh?
It didn't win its timeslot this week, and lots of unsuccessful shows get picked up for a whole season. Like, for example, Back to You, which is one of the reasons PD has been able to (barely) win the 8pm timeslot so far.
quote:
TV peaked with St. Elsewhere, until Joss came along anyway.
Joss peaked with the first three years of Buffy, until--well, he just peaked with the first three years of Buffy, period. At least he HAD a peak. More than Bryan Fuller can say.
