We all heard the rumours that Robert Guza Jr. may be exiting General Hospital, but along with those rumours comes the spin that this is utterly impossible, considering how stellar GH's ratings and demos have been. Are we all prepared for a little lesson in what ratings and demos actually mean? What their significance actually is? Because week in and week out, the ratings are announced and competing/opposing fan bases rush in to spin them to their (dis)advantage. Love me or hate me for doing this, it's high time someone took the time to de-bunk some of the rumours about what ratings/demos mean for ABC Daytime.

Myth #1: General Hospital is raking in the cash for ABC because of their performance in the ratings/demos

False! Winning the 18-49 demo ultimately doesn't mean as much as GH fans would like it to mean. It's an indication of the popularity of the show, but it is NOT -- as far as advertisers are concerned -- an indication of the marketability of the show. The 18-49 demo is the standard demo, not the premium demo.

It is also a broad demo, meaning that it indicates nothing about household income or buying behaviors, both of which are very important to ad rates. These "deeper" demos are the ones that can dramatically impact ad rates for an individual show - best example is West Wing where the average income of the viewer is over $100K.

Also, advertisers look at how the average age of the viewer skews within the standard demo. If you lead in 18-49 but your average age is 40, advertisers aren't fooled. Also, the size of the lead is important, if GH leads by .8 then advertisers will notice; if it's by .2 they aren't impressed.

In order for GH's ratings and demos to affect ad rates, TPTB (The Powers That Be) would have to prove two main things: (1) that they can consistantly, over a long term, deliver these ratings/demos and (2) that *within* that 18-49 demo, GH has a "lock" on a demographic that has and SPENDS money. GH cannot prove either.

Myth #2: General Hospital is the soap that sets the ad rates for ABC Daytime

False! It's a fact that GH's ratings and demos do not affect, in any way, the price that companies pay to advertise on ABC Daytime. Ad rates in general are multiples, a rate - usually "cost per million" - multiplied by the rating promised then checked against the actual rating delivered. Sometimes there are add-on multiples for being the number one show, but that is ALWAYS number one overall, not number one in a specific demo.

In order for GH's ratings/demos to have an impact on the advertising rate that is set, TPTB at GH would have to PROVE to the advertisers that their ratings/demos are and will remain consistantly high. ABC cannot go to an advertiser and say, "GH had a 3.8 last week! We're asking $XX for a 30-second ad from now on!" In fact, even at the end of three or six months of consecutive high ratings, GH *still* could not go to an advertiser and increase their ad rates.

The reason is simple: GH has a spotty, inconsistent history with ratings. ABC couldn't DREAM of using the current ratings/demos to increase their ad rates because, quite simply, no advertiser would believe that they could deliver those ratings/demos over any length of time. If ABC raised their ad rates because GH is #1 in demos (more specifically, is #1 in demos with no proof that their demographic actually spends money) and in a month, they slipped to #2 in the demos and #6 in the ratings, every last person in sales would be fired and ABC would have a legion of furious advertisers AND AGENCIES on their hands, demanding to be either refunded OR given free advertising time to compensate for the money they over-spent.

It should also be noted that, contrary to popular opinion here at SZ, advertisers cannot buy ad space during only ONE ABC soap opera. Advertisers cannot specifically choose which soap they want to sponsor; they have to purchase advertising time and spread it out over a minimum of TWO ABC soaps. (You can buy a single spot on a specific show from an affiliate or a media agency but it's not cost-effective for big advertisers. )

Check the ABC daytime ratings and do the math: ABC wouldn't *dare* raise its advertising rates based upon its overall performance in the ratings/demos. Until they can do what CBS has consistantly done for months now -- deliver, on a weekly basis, a demographic that has and spends money -- ABC will have to remain content with whatever advertising dollars it gets.

Myth #3: General Hospital is ABC Daytime's biggest money-maker

I have said this so many times before but I'll say it again: advertisers only care about money and image. Nothing else. They would rather advertise during a lower-rated show that media research has PROVEN has a lock on a demographic that spends money, than advertise on a higher-rated show that research has proven has an audience that largely refuses to loosen up the purse strings.

For example, the lower-rated All My Children has LONG had a very faithful affluent gay following that spends a lot of money. As such, AMC may actually be much more appealing to advertisers because their own research, over a period of how ever many years, has proven to them that advertising to AMC's demographic translates into products sold and money made. Until General Hospital can assure advertisers that advertising to their viewers will translate into $$$$$, sponsors are going to remain more interested in the lower-rated AMC than in the higher-rated GH.

Yes, irony of irony, you read that right: AMC may actually be the most appealing show to advertisers because AMC has consistently proven that its audience will buy the products advertised on its show. GH has an inconsistent record on this.

Myth #4: ABC would never fire Robert Guza Jr. because the ratings/demos are so good

False! Repeat after me: advertisers care ONLY about money and image. GH does *not* have the kind of image that advertisers want to associate their products with. Now, as much as I would *LOVE* to claim that Target: GH is the reason why advertisers are growing increasingly wary of advertising during GH, I can't do that. GH has been having an image problem with advertisers for quite some time now, LONG before Target: GH even came into existence. We capitalized on *KNOWING* that advertisers only care about money and image, but we hardly invented the concept. Effective campaigns -- whether they be related to TV, movies or radio -- always go for the advertisers. The networks themselves are ultimately irrelevent. [How many people have written a letter criticizing an actor or storyline and gotten an autographed picture of said actor in return? Doesn't that indicate how closely they read your letters?] If Target: ! GH is a convenient scapegoat, so be it -- but opening your eyes to the *REAL* issues may be a better idea.

If you're an advertiser, you do NOT want your product associated with a show that mocks the very audience (predominantly female) to which you are targeting your product, and contrary to what people in general may think, there has been very little, since Guza's return to GH, to convince advertisers that GH is *the* show on which to place their products. There are issues that advertisers have with GH that *far* pre-date the Target: GH campaign.

Advertisers want to sell their products on a show that mothers will allow their daughters to watch. They want to sell on a show that professional women (those with $$ to spend) want to watch. They want viewers in a mindset that's receptive to advertising, not fighting off nausea because of what they see on the screen. GH, for over a year now, has NOT catered to advertisers. It has, for some unfathomable reason, messed with the daytime formula: Guza/Pratt ignored the very female audience that would have translated into money, and instead chose to cater the show to viewers who ultimately stroke their egos but don't translate into advertising money. This is not hyperbole; it is FACT.

There are certain elements to daytime dramas that women love, and that translate into advertising money: glamour, fashion, adventure and ROMANCE/SEX! This is *the* daytime formula. It has been time-tested and proven.

What of those elements has GH offered lately? What on the show would appeal to a professional audience that has cash to spend? The images of women sitting at home without careers or lives? The portrayal of women as appendages to their partners? The endless violence that we see, day in and day out?

Guza, in his infinite short-sightedness, decided that he would try to cater GH to a *MALE* audience by capitalizing on *MALE* fantasies. Yes, GH has female viewers -- no doubt about it --but GH has yet to prove to advertisers that the female viewers who are watching GH at this point in time will actually spend money on their products. Now, if you work for Suzi's Custom Leather Belts (man, I hope that's not a real company name!) and your marketing/research team is checking out what daytime dramas would be good for your product, and they tune into GH and see women being belittled, women without careers, women with no glamour, and not a professional woman in sight, do you REALLY think they're going to approach the CEO and say, "GH is *the* place! They don't cater to women, they're pulling out guns every two seconds, they're drugging their wives, and there's no indication that the show's viewers spend money but BY GOD THEY'VE GOT GREAT RATINGS/DEMOS!"

Get real. It doesn't happen, will never happen.

If Guza is fired -- I mean, given an "exit clause" -- don't blame Target: GH or Minnie in FumBuck, USA who dared write a letter to a sponsor or the GH fans who happen NOT to like your favorite character: put the blame ONLY where it belong -- squarely on the shoulders of Guza, Phelps and Frons who seem to have *no* understanding of what daytime television is supposed to be. Blame it on writers who make sure that whether an marketing/advertising team tunes in on Monday or on Friday, during this week or next week, they are GUARANTEED to see something offensive that will scare them away from advertising on GH.

Myth #5: Advertisers are impressed by the Daytime Emmy win

False. I'll make this plain and simple: Advertisers don't give a **** about art.

Myth #6: Viewers do not "own" the show

False. Plain and simple: we do! *WE* set the advertising rates. *WE* make the show popular. *WE* make advertisers happy. *OUR MONEY* makes sponsors cream their pants. *OUR* loyalty to a show is what can translate into advertising dollars. *WE* determine the direction the show takes. We own it. Without us, without viewers and fans, GH is NOTHING!

Myth #7: GH/ABC is doing better than CBS or NBC daytime

A complicated question. The Bell shows on CBS (YR and BB) have high ratings and a large secondary market - that means they can charge CBS less for their shows and still rake in the bucks. That means CBS is assured a tidy profit on these shows. The P&G (PROCTER & GAMBLE) shows have lower ratings and no secondary market but they are prestige shows for P&G, aka, they are subsidized. P&G will do what it needs to do to make sure CBS makes a profit on these shows. Y&R has the largest audience, it pulls in about roughly the same number of female viewers between 18-49 as GH, a larger number of male viewers in the same bracket and of older viewers. On NBC, where both shows have strong secondary markets, they'd made a conscious decision to go after females under 34. Passions is delivering a unique demo - not the most desirable (females 12-17) but one that is harder to get in large numbers on a broadcast network. Therefore they can charge a slightly higher ad rate. DAYS does consistently well in 18-34, another "unique" demo, so they can charge a slightly higher ad rate.

If you look at gross domestic ad revenues (not rates), GH ranks number 4. If you look at overall ad revenues, it's not a pretty picture for ANY ABC soap.

Bottom Line: You can't spin what ratings and demos really mean to advertisers, nor can you spin how ratings and demos may or may not translate into advertising dollars. Ad rates are set and rarely fluctuate because NOBODY in sales would put their career on the line for a lie. It's really as simple as that.

If the rumour that Guza may "exit" GH is disturbing to you, well, what can I say? The writing has been on the wall since they took over. Fans of the show should have, for over a year now, been writing GH and demanding better storylines for their favorite actors/characters rather than being complacent and being content with just getting a glimpse of them on the show every day. Had the fans done that from day one, GH would *NOT* be in the mess it's in right now and advertisers AND ABC itself would not be inundated with letters from ****ed-off viewers. (Again, I'd love for Target: GH to take sole credit for this, but this has been going on since G/P took over, which is INFINITELY longer than the campaign has been in existence).

The way many of us see it is quite simple: screw the ratings and demos and focus on the show itself! Do what many Laura Wright fans have been doing: write ABC and tell them that you love Sonny and Carly but want Carly to have a better storyline! You're not HURTING your faves by complaining -- you're HELPING them! Do what NLG fans have been doing: contact ABC and tell them that you're appalled that there is not ONE professional woman left on GH! Do what Robin Christopher fans did: write GH and tell them that you are sick and tired of Skye falling back to alcoholism. Do what fans of the show as a whole did: contact GH and tell them that you're not going to watch their show anymore *AND* you will contact their advertisers if they don't stop shoving *MALE* fantasies of guns and violence and obedient women in your face!

THAT is your real power. Spinning the ratings/demos and living in a fantasy bubble doesn't do a danged thing for the state of this show and it sure as hell doesn't do a danged thing for the advertisers who make the show possible, but who are increasingly wary of associating their products with a soap that has a less-than-stellar image in the advertising world.

Great post, but I must say that fans have been bitching about the quality of GH for YEARS and nothing is done. We write the soap mags, email, complaint on message boards like this one and nothing is done. ABC uses things like Emmy wins and ratings to justify sticking with what they have.

I know it's rumored that Guza is out, but I'll believe it when I see it. GH has been much worse under his control and still they do nothing. I'm not holding my breath.

Fascinating.

Any insight on OLTL and where it fits in the food chain?

OLTL is ABC's step-child Frons as made it clear he really doesn't care for OLTL and as I see it if Frons stays where he is for another year or so I expect OLTL to be canceled by Frons.

Robert

I get that OLTL is the red headed step child. I was curious as to if it had any unique and valuable audience segment like that mentioned for AMC or something along those lines. How do things like ABCD's obvious bid for the youth audience impact ad rates when it is costing them the die heard loyal fans in their 30's? I guess I'm puzzled as to why OLTL is doing absolutely everything in its power to take the loyal fans it's had for years and who have stuck with them for years and telling them to take a hike you aren't welcome or wanted.