The coveted demo numbers show that the upticks reflect 2 1/2 Men, The Office and House. That's all the advertisers care about isn't it?
quote:
Originally posted by TV-aholic: Good to see that Criminal Minds is the ONLY show to be UP from last year.
quote:
Originally posted by Xavier: Year to year changes for shows based on the first full week of May Sweep. Ranked by declines (from worst to best) in 18-49.
QUESTION: Who can answer this one? What is the GA avg. rating (new episodes only) up against a new CSI vs. going against a repeat CSI?
Because I think there are 4 categories
new Grey's vs. new CSI new Grey's vs. a repeat CSI repeat Grey's vs. new CSI repeat Grey's vs. repeat CSI
quote:
Originally posted by robert:
quote:
Originally posted by Chimera: I disagree -- for a two hour episode of mostly the "new" cast/show, this was excellent. I think ABC will be thrilled -- to get numbers higher than a regular Grey's got the last few weeks with the show being 95% the spin=off is a great sign. Also great that A18-49 stayed steady at 9.1 through the 10pm and 10:30 hr.
quote:
Originally posted by robert: In my opinion those are so-so numbers for Grey's Anatomy. I mean with all the buzz for the spin-off 20 million does'n seem impressive. Also bad numbers for CSI and Shark, much lower than their average
GA's numbers from yestarday are actually below the average this season (and below by a significant margin). And with all the buzz many were expecting at least 22-23 million viewers
Originally posted by SciFi Lover: I was referring to the change in timeslot.
I agree that an earlier timeslot will help Lost; not because more people will really watch, but because less people will timeshift to the next day. That 10pm timeslot is always going to take the biggest hit from people timeshifting.
I forgot that if more people are timeshifting it because its on a later time -- then less people are talking about it the following day. The people who have timeshifted it -- don't want anyone to talk about it.
In regards to DVR usage -- I thought that nielsens have added dvr usage to their ratings.
Originally posted by filmkr27: I forgot that if more people are timeshifting it because its on a later time -- then less people are talking about it the following day. The people who have timeshifted it -- don't want anyone to talk about it.
I would chalk that effect up to one big reason why ER is down in the ratings. People want to see CSI and Grey's Anatomy before heading off to work the next day to talk about it. Ultimately, I think shows with lots of 'buzz' won't get timeshifted nearly as much since people do share around the watercooler the next day.
quote:
In regards to DVR usage -- I thought that nielsens have added dvr usage to their ratings.
Nielsen's main ratings cover 'same day' timeshifting. I think 'same day' in this case means soemthing weird like watching the show before 2am the day after it was aired.
The Inverse Law of Super-Sizing™ Definition: Increased airtime in a funky timeslot equates to decreased viewership.
As much as I love getting an extra 10-15 minutes of shenanigans on "The Office" when NBC decides to go the super-sized route, the unusual airtimes really seem to hurt viewership levels. (The same applies to whatever airs after it and, to a lesser extent, lead-in "Earl," which retains its normal start time and isn't affected quite as much.) Sadly, even in the Information Age, the vast majority of fans just don't pay close enough attention to know if a show is airing from 8:35 to 9:19 instead of the normal timeslot. This week's "Office" had a particularly odd slot, whereas next week's will at least air in the more "traditional" super-sized 8:40-9:20 window. Still, even that is such a departure from the established norm that many fans won't know what's going on.
And to make matters worse, some fans who DO know about the funky airtime are probably more likely to just record it and watch other programs that adhere to the standard half-hour timeslots - and the ratings boost the show gets from +7 really doesn't matter much to advertisers, because they assume (rightly so) that people just skip the commercials.
So while the extra airtime is great for those of us who are "in the know," it's a double-edged sword because it actually hurts the show's performance in a business sense. Regardless of the show's quality creatively, lower ratings are never a good thing. Perhaps NBC should consider abandoning the super-sizing concept and find ways to keep its programs in the normal half-hour timeslots (possibly by using more hour-long special episodes), because the super-sizing premise no longer leads to higher ratings as it once did during the heyday of Must-See TV.
Posts: 30 | Location: Evansville, IN | Registered: 20 November 2006
I thought that nielsens have added dvr usage to their ratings.
they're doing Live+7 ratings reports now (obviously, those come out a week after their weekly Live+SD ratings reports do). the ratings we see are Live plus Same Day (anything viewed up to 3am)
Posts: 4470 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: 21 September 2006
Originally posted by Squizz44: This week's "Office" had a particularly odd slot, whereas next week's will at least air in the more "traditional" super-sized 8:40-9:20 window.
Didn't The Office start at its normal time?
quote:
Perhaps NBC should consider abandoning the super-sizing concept and find ways to keep its programs in the normal half-hour timeslots (possibly by using more hour-long special episodes), because the super-sizing premise no longer leads to higher ratings as it once did during the heyday of Must-See TV.
I think you hit on the key problem there. When NBC really was 'must see', people were tuned in and the 'super-sized' episodes all but eliminated the chance that they would channel surf between shows. Now, with hardly anyone watching NBC, the weird timeslots just serve to alienate people further.
CBS opened the evening on a winning note, with Survivor: Fiji at 13.72 million viewers and a 4.5 rating/14 share among adults 18-49 from 8-9 p.m. Comparably, however, that was a decrease from Survivor: Panama on the year-ago evening (Viewers: 17.04 million, A18-49: 5.9/18 on May 4, 2006) of 3.32 million viewers and 24 percent among adults 18-49. Even so, there is still some left in the aging franchise.
But not very much left. I think CBS would do best with only one cycle next season, in the fall, and try something new in the spring.
Originally posted by GMYERS: Weak demo numbers for CBS. They should cancel Shark for something with more appeal for a younger audience. They seem to be catering to the older CSI audience for a 10:00 show. They have to go younger.
Why? CBS is doing pretty well with the audience it has. Going younger is not what CBS is about.
