quote:

Originally posted by dumont:
Even just looking at Thursday and Friday of last week, MyNetworkTV is trending much stronger this Sweep than a year ago, and it is the only network that can make that claim.

MNTV is trending stronger than its last year numbers. It is not trending in 2/3rds strength to CW. That 'trend' you stated is only because you added in the lowest 3 hours of CW programming during the week while ignoring the two hours of weak weekend MNTV programming.

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by TV-aholic:
Without the leads, the supporting cast would dissapear.

My point was more along the lines of: without the supporting cast, this show would be another 6-7million viewer sitcom. The reason that it is the top sitcom on TV today is the supporting cast elevates the show.

I think that can truely be said about ANY series, not just 2.5 Men

Where would Everybody Love Raymond be if it didn't have a great Barone Famly as the supporting cast?

How about Seinfeld without George, Elaine and Kramer?

I tell where thay would be, exactly where "The Michael Richards Show" ended up.

Games, Games, Games and.... More Games

The PI Feedback is becoming a place for games. Games about TV and the ratings.
Here are what we have available going into the May Sweeps.


The Daily Game
Each day we pick one show and you guess how many Total Viewers it will get and it's 18-49 demo rating. Accumulate Medals to see how well you can do with the other players.


The PI Feedback Challenge
This game, you pick 5 shows, one from each network, that you will think will do the best over a 4 week period. Play more games and make a run for the PIFC Cup, a "season" long race for who does best in the PIFC. New Games debut on Thursdays/Fridays of each week.


The PI Feedback Challenge May Sweeps Game
An extention of the PI Feedback Challenge game. For the may Sweeps, there is a new twist. Each day you can best up to 20 Berman Bucks, based on what you think the 18-49 ratings will be for the shows you select. The winner will be the person who has the most Berman Bucks at the end of the May Sweeps.


The 2nd Annual Lemon Awards
Help us celebrate and award the WORST in TV this season. Part 1 voting is now live. Select who you think is the Worse Actor is in a Drama Series. What was the Worse Strike-Filler program? and who will win this years Lifetime Un-Achievement Award?

You know, the arguments about this network versus that network and the tenths of a point differences make me think of something...in politics (my background), polling is always stated with a "margin of error"...given the relatively small sample sizes for Nielsen, what is the margin of error on the ratings?

quote:

I think that can truely be said about ANY series, not just 2.5 Men

Where would Everybody Love Raymond be if it didn't have a great Barone Famly as the supporting cast?

How about Seinfeld without George, Elaine and Kramer?

I tell where thay would be, exactly where "The Michael Richards Show" ended up.

I think you can argue that in the case of Seinfeld and Raymond, there was an ENSEMBLE cast, even though the guys the shows were named after obviously were at the center.

In the case of 2.5Men, you've got a two lead show (okay, 2.5 leads), with a revolving cast of eccentrics they are reacting to. You don't see all of these characters in every show, whereas you'll never see an ep of Seinfeld that doesn't have George, Kramer, & Elaine, or too many eps of Raymond that don't feature all the Barones.

So in those shows, the cast is really the star, but in 2.5Men, you have two stars (plus the kid), and the supporting players really ARE supporting players--they don't have storylines of their own, to speak of, they are simply there to provide the essential backdrop within which the lead characters exist.

You're not going to see Rose in a scene that doesn't involve one of the three (or 2.5) title characters.

And to me, this is what's wrong with the show, but I'm not really their target audience.

To all the complaints about DH's Gabrielle... she's always been a selfish bitch. I'm not sure what all the anger is coming from. The show has never tried to be particularly realistic or good. It's always been a moderately entertaining satire of soaps...

PS, regarding shows touching on subjects like rape, etc.

Has it occurred to anyone that perhaps by showing that these things exist people might have more examples to relate to in life if/when they happen to them?

I hardly think some weirdo out there is going to get the idea to abuse an animal from watching DH.

Not to beat a dead horse, but original "REBA" episodes averaged about 3.63 million viewers last season when The CW aired 13 episodes to fulfill the contract before abruptly ending the series. While fewer than 4 million is nothing to brag about (although the season opener and series finale averaged 4.4 million viewers), it certainly outperformed all other CW comedies last season and this year - not to mention much of the rest of the netlet's current schedule. As an advertiser, I don't understand...

quote:

Originally posted by TOTP:
The CW should do someting next season, becuae these numbers are just pathetic. The ANTM repeat doing 1.02 million and a 0.5 in the demo, I can understand. But EHC is actually funny, and I believe it premiered on UPN 2 seasons ago with almost 7 million viewers. And now it can barely crack the 1 million mark sometimes. It's just horrible to see the these numbers. Their doing something wrong, because the show doesn't deserve these ratings. Escpecially for an original.

quote:

To all the complaints about DH's Gabrielle... she's always been a selfish bitch. I'm not sure what all the anger is coming from. The show has never tried to be particularly realistic or good. It's always been a moderately entertaining satire of soaps...

Well yeah, except the soaps it's satirizing were pretty satirical in the first place, and some of THEM were actually satirizing earlier soaps, so it's getting a bit thin....

I agree with you that the reaction makes no sense, but what's sense got to do with any of this? Part of it is just animal lovers feeling that something sacred to them has been exploited, but I don't think that's really the main thing.

The main thing is that people have fallen out of love with DH and its characters. When people are really high on a show, they forgive everything--when they are hooked on a given character, that character can't really do anything wrong. Then time passes, the infatuation weakens, and I guess people feel like "She ought to know better by now", and then a less forgiving standard is applied.

It's not fair, but what's fair got to do with anything?

This is why most shows shouldn't run for years and years. The networks should stop going for long-lasting hits they rarely ever manage to come up with--they should keep changing up, so the viewers don't have time to fall out of love with the characters, and start tearing them to shreds.

quote:

Originally posted by Cory:
As an advertiser, I don't understand...

I kinda doubt that you are an advertiser. Advertisers want ratings...the higher the ratings, the more they are willing to pay to advertise. However, if the cost of the show rises higher than the rate at which advertisers are willing to pay, then the show is unprofitable. If Reba didn't want so much money, FOX studios and CW network wouldn't have had to end the show.

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by Cory:
As an advertiser, I don't understand...

I kinda doubt that you are an advertiser. Advertisers want ratings...the higher the ratings, the more they are willing to pay to advertise. However, if the cost of the show rises higher than the rate at which advertisers are willing to pay, then the show is unprofitable. If Reba didn't want so much money, FOX studios and CW network wouldn't have had to end the show.

I'm sure a deal could've been worked out to continue the show at a lower fee. Afterall, NBC still manages to get Warner Brothers to lower the fee on ER every year, probably to the point where its not profitable for them, except with the added syndication revenue (something I'm sure Reba brings in).

quote:

Originally posted by mushu_jj:
I'm sure a deal could've been worked out to continue the show at a lower fee.

I've never seen anything to indicate that Reba was willing to take less money to keep the show going. If she was, FOX could have continued the show on their own network or on cable in order to reap the syndication benefits related to a larger episode count.

Ongoing Sunday tracking for NBC

Dateline
4.89 1.4/5
5.92 1.3/4
5.01 1.2/4
6.87 1.5/5

Monk
5.74 1.5/4
5.25 1.1/3
5.58 1.2/3
5.77 1.0/3

Psych
3.98 1.3/3
4.24 1.2/3
4.04 1.1/3
3.44 1.0/2

L&O SVU
7.12 1.9/5 (SVU)
5.51 1.5/4 (SVU)
5.95 1.6/4 (SVU)
6.46 1.8/5 (SVU)

Night totals
5.43 1.5/4
5.23 1.3/3
5.15 1.3/4
5.63 1.3/4

Once again NBC trended down in final numbers so will the highest night total yet hold up come finals? Monk is showing minuscule weekly increases but Psych is still bouncing around with a very low number this week. If it keeps up, Psych, a personal favorite of mine, will probably be banished back to USA for the rest of its life.

Funny that you (a) doubt I'm an advertiser, and (2) attempt to educate me on how advertisers chase ratings points. That's cute. Keep up the condescension. It fits you well.

quote:

Originally posted by Obveeus:

quote:

Originally posted by Cory:
As an advertiser, I don't understand...

I kinda doubt that you are an advertiser. Advertisers want ratings...the higher the ratings, the more they are willing to pay to advertise. However, if the cost of the show rises higher than the rate at which advertisers are willing to pay, then the show is unprofitable. If Reba didn't want so much money, FOX studios and CW network wouldn't have had to end the show.