Originally posted by Remus Lupin: Well, oh my gosh, let's put it this way. Lost builds like 8-9 million viewers from it's lead-in per week. Don't you think that's impressive?
No, it's not there to be a lead in. It's there to be a lead out for Eli Stone. It's supposed to be an anchor.
Originally posted by Chimera: If by that person you mean me, I never said "noone would watch LOST on a timeshift basis" -- in fact I've said consistently that it's one of the highest live+7 ratings.
Correct. You claimed that it was one of the highest timeshifted series last season and that this season with the move to 9pm, people wouldn't have to timeshift anymore and they would watch live instead. You used that as the basis for your argument that Lost would jump from its 14 million viewer core to 18 million viewers this season. You also incorrectly claimed that Marc's ratings numbers do not include same day timeshifting in the totals already.
I didn't claim it was one the most time-shifted shows, it was one of the top time-shifted shows -- in fact, #1 in some categories. And I didn't use that info to say it would go from 14 million last season to 18 million this season, I said it go up from the 11-12 it averaged over its Spring run to 14 - 18 million for its premiere (the premiere actually averaged 16 million, right smack in the middle of my forecast), and no less than 14 million this season. So yeah, it's down to 13.5 million viewers, so "technically" I'm wrong -- but you're the one that insisted that it wouldn't increase at all this season, and you were proven wrong.
And again, you're leaving out the other part of the reason I thought it would increase, and that was the horrific lead-in it had on Wednesdays, In case of Emergency, which it had to routinely out-performed by 300% to get to that 11-12 million.
I've been pretty consistent with what I say -- you, on the other hand, keep jumping around, never discussing the point I make but move on to a different point. My reply was addressing your original statement, which you deleted, which you said I claimed LOST's time-shifting would affect its ratings on Thursdays @ 10pm. Again, two different things.
Originally posted by Remus Lupin: Well, oh my gosh, let's put it this way. Lost builds like 8-9 million viewers from it's lead-in per week. Don't you think that's impressive?
No, it's not there to be a lead in. It's there to be a lead out for Eli Stone. It's supposed to be an anchor.
It is an anchor -- they are competitive on Thursdays with LOST. What other day of the week can you say ABC has remained competitive during the strike -- just Sunday, which has the other anchor, EM:HE. The rest of the week they have very little -- Tuesdays, Fridays, and Saturdays are a black hole, Mondays were barely passable on the portion of the night Dance War was on but a nightmare the second half, and Wednesdays are only barely managing to stay afloat.
Lost isn't what it used to be. Lets agree on that, didn't it pull in 20 million viewers its first season? Now it is at 13. Why? Because ABC kept moving it. Now they are moving it again, people might not follow because they, 1) sick the continuing moving of the show 2) watch another show at 10. So my prediction is that it will go down, but not that much, or it might stay the same, but i highly doubt it is going to increase.
Competitive on Thursdays? Well I hope so, what is it going against? Nothing really. In all reality it should be doing better, it did have a 16 million in its 1st show this season, why the decrease? With no real competition. ABC is happy, but I bet they were expecting more. Thursdays at 9 is possibly the most watched hour of the week, and it is falling against weaker shows.
Originally posted by Drew: Lost isn't what it used to be. Lets agree on that, didn't it pull in 20 million viewers its first season?
To the best of my knowledge not even a single episode in Season 1 got more then 20 million. The range was 17-18 million.
LOST premiered around 15-16 million in the first season and then got up to 17-18 by the 1st season finale. Early season two was its peak, with the unveiling of "What in the hatch" The first 2-3 episodes were over 20 million, in fact I think it top 23 million once, then got back and settled around 18 million for season 2. Season 3 is when it took its biggest fall, and I've made plenty of posts here about why it did that. Suffice to say, pretty much every big hit has suffered a 10-15% drop in that same time (I think DWTS may be an exception). It stays at 13-14 million, ABC will be happy.
Originally posted by Drew: Competitive on Thursdays? Well I hope so, what is it going against? Nothing really. In all reality it should be doing better, it did have a 16 million in its 1st show this season, why the decrease? With no real competition. ABC is happy, but I bet they were expecting more. Thursdays at 9 is possibly the most watched hour of the week, and it is falling against weaker shows.
We already covered that CSI had a bump due to the much hyped CSI/WAT cross-over, Fox had a special American Idol to lead-off the night, which increased ratings for DFTL -- and despite of that, LOST held steady to last week, in fact almost identical viewers and numbers, despite what I personally consider a below-average episode -- how is that falling against weaker shows?
Every hit show has a bigger premiere than its season average -- no show, not American Idol, DH, CSI, no show, keeps its season premiere ratings up throughout the season.
Unscripted - American Idol - DWtS - Sunday Night Football - Moment of Truth - Deal or No Deal
DOND rarely pulls 17 to 18 million. SVU never does. Moment of Truth only pulled that due to Idol. Its now in the 13 million range with Idol as a lead in. Sunday Night Football varies greatly with some eps pulling 20 million. Some eps pull 10 million. Even CSI: Miami hasn't pulled 16 million this season. So that leaves NCIS, CSI, House, DWTS, and American Idol as CONSISTENT performers of 17 million or more.
Just bumping my thought on this so people were clear as to what I originally meant here. And it should be noted that I was wrong, there are 5 shows on or above Greys level. There are however about 5 total consistently.
Originally posted by Chimera: For those of you dismissing LOST's ratings, please consider that it has pretty much been acting on its own to hold up ABC for weeks now -- this and EM:HE are the only shows that have cracked the 10 million mark. The next closest was Dance War, and that's over now. No new DH, no new Grey's, no DWTS, not even Ugly Betty. And even though I watch a lot of tv, I've hardly seen it advertised since its premiere, so the audience is almost exclusively tuning in because they are passionate about it. Now, factor in the Oscars this Sunday, Oprah's Big Give premiering in a couple of weeks, and DWTS returning on March 17, following by their full slate of hits in another month after that, and there is no reason to expect that LOST would perform on Thursdays @ 10pm following Grey's what it did on Wednesdays @ 10pm last year following In Case of Emergency.
Lost isn't a lead-in dependent show so it doesn't really matter if it's after GA or after In Case of Emergency
No it's not -- my point is that the people watching it now are its core viewers. While it's not lead-dependent, a good lead-in never hurts, it's just that it helps some shows more than others. And the shows that have failed following Grey's had nothing to do with the fact that Grey's was their lead-in but much more to do with the fact that they were poor shows.
Yeah but some of its "core" viewers might leave the show once it moves at 10pm
Very doubtful -- if you're willing to follow it across 4 different time changes on 2 different days, I doubt pushing it back an hour with one of the strongest lead-in on ABC's schedule is going to harm it that much. Those viewers that would have left are part of the 2.5 - 3 million that have left since it's premiere. Unless the actual episodes suck, I can't see the time-shift playing that significant of a negative factor.
This 10pm argument is a non starter.
LOST may lose viewers over other issues but not this.
This hour in particular can do big #'s when the right shows are there such as ER and WAT in their better days.
Or those Barbara Walters and Oprah Winfrey specials.
ITA! It's all about the programming -- what ABC had at 10pm the last couple of years didn't do well because they were not good shows. Period.
And I'm bumping this because this point seems to be lost on some people.
Originally posted by Chimera: but you're the one that insisted that it wouldn't increase at all this season, and you were proven wrong.
I never said that. You keep confusing me with other people or with an argument you wished you were having rather than the one you were actually having. Meanwhile, you most definitely did say that people that DVR'ed last year would watch ,ive this year. You used that as part of you claim as to why ratings would go up. And you also claimed that sameday timeshifting is not already counted in the ratings as a way to justify your math moving Lost from 14 million to 18 million. Own up to it.
quote:
I've been pretty consistent with what I say -- you, on the other hand, keep jumping around, never discussing the point I make but move on to a different point.
You just stated the exact opposite of what is truthfully occurring. Go back and reread the old thread again if you need help. Do not apply any of what other people said as being somthing I said. Do not avoid the things that you said. You claimed that timeshifters were going to boost the number and you used as your basis the incorrect belief that the timeshift numbers aren't largely already included in Marc's data.
quote:
My reply was addressing your original statement, which you deleted, which you said I claimed LOST's time-shifting would affect its ratings on Thursdays @ 10pm. Again, two different things.
I'm not even sure what you just wrote. What did I delete? When was I taking issue with 10pm Thursday discussion?
Originally posted by Obveeus: Lost has always been a failure in that role.
It's not Lost responsibility to make sure that shows following it get good ratings. If those shows suck no one can do anything about it. For the record in 2005 when Lost was a lead in to Alias, Alias got a massive bump in its ratings and did quite well, similarly Invasion premiered to about 17 million viewers behind Lost, the fact it lost half of those viewers in the next few weeks is a testament to the show not being good enough.
