te.

Yes, but you're potentially comparing someone who started watching a show when it was good and sticking with it through a rough patch and actually tuning into a new show. You can't start your show off bad and expect people to tune in - to even like the characters there has to be enough good writing and foundation for you to stick out the bad times (and even then we all have our limits).

It's the 30 second elevator pitch isn't it? Describe a show and get people interested. Loving and Generations just didn't have that.

Yes, exactly. Make the conflict about how a black family owned business would promote "white"* families for profit. This could've been a controversial soap opera forcing people to tune in because it showed how cynical the business is, and ultimately lead to progression! * I throw in "" because of how we know diversity is often sold in ads where you have one family member of "ambigious" race.

https://www.eonline.com/news/1390549/shannen-doherty-shares-cancer-has-spread-to-her-bones

Santa Barbara under 3.0 for the first (?) time! That show just suddenly started crashing after the 80s; of course the downfall of NBC daytime and the "supercouple" era didn't help.

Exactly right. It didn't exactly scream glamour and passion - maybe that was a conscious decision in the sense that it's the type of show that does well in syndication reruns, but it's not something that soap viewers would specifically tune into daily. But in all honesty, besides "the first show focusing on black characters" I just don't get the feeling there was much of a pitch. I guess in that sense I feel the same way towards Generations that I do towards Loving - it just feels dated and not really that well-defined. It probably doesn't help that the time slot hadn't housed a soap in the past few years after Search was cancelled. Maybe they could've had a production company since they started with the "fake soap" opening - one that ironically would focus on white characters despite the company itself being run by black people. It would've at least opened up some conflict, I guess social commentary and would've been a "sexier" and more exciting business.

I think it's unfair to compare anyone to Donna - she's clearly had great styling, plastic surgery and the ability to know when to quit and not go for the "too youthful" route. She looks like herself, even if it's blatantly obvious she's had quite a bit of help over the years. I think the biggest issue with Morgan's wig is that the hairline looks so very off. Donna's looks like it's based in her own hairline while Morgan is clearly going for the straight-on fake look.

Eh, in the same tv guide interview where she announced she was leaving she also stated that she'd "do some episodes". It seems like a classic case of Joan playing word games plus not wanting to admit that they wouldn't pay for her to do the entire season.

To be fair, I don't think they expected Dynasty to do well in the slot - usually when they move an aging show the hope is that it'll do well-enough to at least act as a band-aid while they focus on other time slots (as you said, China Beach and thirtysomething were clearly priorities for the "new era" ABC). In Dynasty's defence, it was usually the best rated show on ABC for that night, but of course that maybe just shows you what a trainwreck Thursdays were for them. If Knots hadn't been in the 10 PM slot on CBS they might've moved up Dynasty for another season if they could've gotten it for a low enough budget to attempt to make something work on that night. But obviously, they saw a few years earlier what happened to The Colby's when it and Knots went head-to-head.

Hell, in a recent interview Nicolette Sheridan pointed out that Knots was a night time drama. People still have an aversion to the term soap for whatever reason.

Well, yes. Central Park West probably would've been more successful if it had been on Fox as an example as the only thing that was "wrong" with that show was that it was on the wrong network. Savannah was off-brand for the youthful The WB and was too expensive since it didn't repeat well and they couldn't afford doing more than 22 episodes per season. NBC is the one network that never found their "brand" of prime time soaps - though you could argue that the Dick Wolf brand of Chicagos are soaps...

Actually, looking at it, I wonder if Morgan was originally set to play the role Loni's playing (which would go well with her whole "always the bridesmaid, never the bride" type of success with prime time soaps) and they might've wanted another name (Dame Joan probably) for the role Morgan ended up with?

She definitively must've passed on Loni's part. They likely wrote the script once they had secured the talent tbh. These movies aren't exactly hard to write. I do agree Loni was an after-thought. I assume they must've been turned down by Dame Joan at least.

NBC Daytime is just falling apart at this point. Ouch.

I'd imagine that one advantage with DAYS' for actors is the amount of dark weeks since it allows them more time off to do other projects or just plain holidayin'. Considering the insane taping schedule when they do tape I'd think it's a trade-off essentially.

I want a Don and Marlena reunion now with a surprise pregnancy! Never Say Never!

07/27/83 - 13.8/25 08/03/83 - 9.2/17 08/10/83 - 8.9/16 08/17/83 - 10/18 08/24/83 - 9.6/17 It normally didn't even keep it's repeat lead-in of Fall Guy, which was usually around a 13-ish rating.

Is there any information available on Tribes in those Nielsen books?

It actually looks like they used the model that stood in for Alexis in the print ad.

Well, they kind of had their "who shot Alexis" in season 4, only changed the word "shot" to "framed".

With The City and Sunset Beach it's more the fact that they're so aggressively targeted towards Generation X (ie at the time 18-35 year olds), who just wouldn't be likely to be at home to watch television when they were on, hence they missed the boat entirely. Generations and Ryan's Hope weren't specifically target towards that group; who knows who Loving was targeted towards (and of course, The View is targeted towards stay-at-home moms, which fits the time slot like a glove). If there's one good thing to say about The City, it's that it had a very strong presentation about who their audience was; if they managed to convey that in the writing can be discussed. (Incidentally, I'd argue that moving what was perceived as an old-fashioned soap like Love of Life to 4:00 PM was also a bizarre move as the hausfraus who've followed that likely would've been busy with afternoon activities)

I think the biggest issue with The City was that it was aired at 12:30, yet obviously aimed at the Gen X crowd. Same thing with Sunset Beach - even if the intended audience would've been interested, they wouldn't have been at the television to watch it.

I know the guys behind the website and they do what we all do - compile ratings from various known sources. They've never posted anything false.

In hindsight, it does seem like a bit of a waste to keep Another World behind DAYS especially those times when DAYS had ratings resurgences. Maybe not when General Hospital was murdering everything in the way in the time slot, but by the late 80s/early 90s it was odd that they didn't even seem to consider moving it until Passions came along.