Jump to content
Email System Update

November 6-10, 2006

Toups

By Toups
in Ratings Archive

Recommended Posts

  • Members
King Newbie

King

Posted
  • Members
Posted

I agree that the ratings may have been affected by the Election stuff, buttttttt I do think DAYS fans put a spin on the ratings every week so I have to agree with Evan in that respect. Or was it Greg? I don't know. Whoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members
PhoenixRising05 Newbie

PhoenixRising05

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Ok Steve but AMC might have done better on Thursday if not for the episode being a repeat. If everything went as it should, they may have had a larger number (2.4 or 2.5 perhaps) for that day if not for the preemption and having to repeat Wednesday. Everyone said they had a good week so that is possible so how can it be said AMC did better. We don't know that. Yes they held on to the number they had Tuesday but they may have done better for the week and on Thursday if everything stayed in place just like Days. The numbers for the week may have been held down because of the preemption. They might have gotten higher then a 2.3 for that episode if things were different. The only thing that can be claimed is that Days fans were split up between those that had the show Wednesday and chose not to watch Thursday due to a repeat and those that did not have the show Wednesday and tuned in Thursday to see the show.

Bottom line both Wed and Thur should not have been counted but they were and I am sure Days will rebound. It's unfair to compare AMC and Days because like others have said AMC had a decent week and the 2.3 might have been a low number for that episode if it was a good one. Days' Wednesday episode was nothing big so replaying it on Thursday was not going to help. AMC's Wednesday episode may have been a big one and that is why it did better but it may have done much better if not for the preemption.

Who cares-all the numbers suck :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
SteveFrame Newbie

SteveFrame

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Phoenix it is nothing to get mad about. I said I saw the point. The point I was trying to make that if one show can maintain and another can't that there has to be more to it than just the episode repeat. You can't just excuse the rating being bad and say well it would have been this or that without that happening.

And I agree that AMC's episode might have been better if they hadn't lost that day. Who knows - we will never know now. I would just rather see people look at the actual episode and say this may have been the reason some people didn't want to watch it twice rather than just excuse and say it was because of the preemption. Especially after another show that was affected the same way was affected the same way and maintained.

To me and no one has even brought them up, the one that was affected the most by the preemption was Bold & the Beautiful. In a large part of the country their show only aired for 5 minutes on Wednesday. CBS counted that day for them, and did not air that episode the next day. They went back to viewing as normal. They have that crappy 2.9 thrown in for Wednesday, but still they were able to maintain the same rating from last week.

And I agree all the numbers suck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
Mitchapalooza Newbie

Mitchapalooza

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Phoenix I agree with everything you have said.

Also I have never tried to "spin" anything regarding DAYS' ratings...this is the only week where their drop can actually be attributed to something that was outside of the show's control and is ABSOLUTELY to blame for their drop (and this is whether or not AMC dropped, stayed the same or gained or whatever...I fail to see how AMC has ANYTHING to do with DAYS drops or whatever, if AMC fans chose to watch a repeated episode or whatever DOES NOT change the fact that DAYS still went down and I don't think the argument being used is very strong AT all!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
irish secra Newbie

irish secra

Posted
  • Members
Posted

I think that there are several reasons why Days ratings have not rebounded yet.

1. JER did major damage to this show and many viewers tuned out almost for self-preservation. I can't count how many times I would tune out in disgust over what I was seeing on my screen. I firmly believe these viewers won't be back until you prove to them long-term that Days is capable of writing good exciting stories. Hogie is a great writer and given time can probably write stories to lure these viewers back in the long run.

2. The permanent departure of the J&J fan base. True, many of these fans have left in dribbles and drabs over the past two years with Jack constantly dying and all. But Matt's final firing (and let's face it - the show could have kept him - for the Steve story at least) got rid of the final die-hards. I am no longer watching Days on a regular basis. If Matt comes back, I would watch but right now it is just too hard and just easier to give up on Days. This also negatively impacts the Steve/Kayla story because many of their fans were J&J'ers as well.

3. The anger caused by the sudden write-off of Austin/Carrie. Now, I have never been a fan of them but they do have a strong fan base. I know that many of these fans are probably angry they were fired and written off.

4. The slow plodding style of the Steve/Kayla story. This was the one story that could have hooked new viewers and kept old viewers but the story has been so darn slow and unsatisfying that it has been a major disapointment. And could someone give Billie her own love interest. Why is she stuck with everyone else's sloppy seconds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
SteveFrame Newbie

SteveFrame

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Excellent points Irish. Seeing the rise in ratings at their return, I definitely think you are right with the 4th one. The others are valid too, but #4 really is. As I have said they created such a buzz around the show, but it fizzled when their story went nowhere. You can't bring a major character back, create a buzz around them, and then let them trod along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Recent Posts

    • MichaelGL
      ALL SOAPS: Grade May Sweeps 2025

      By MichaelGL · Posted

      BTG: A-  DAYS: B+  Eastenders: C
    • AMCOLTLLover
      EastEnders: Discussion Thread

      By AMCOLTLLover · Posted

      There was a rumor that Jean will die and that’s probably why she’s back then
    • Contessa Donatella
      GH: June 2025 Discussion Thread

      By Contessa Donatella · Posted

      There has been some confusion about Michael & facial burns. Please see this post: https://bsky.app/profile/shallotpeel.bsky.social/post/3lqkrryu54226 I've chosen to put this here instead of the Classic Thread because it is now with the appearance of recast Michael that this has come up. Different places online, including at least one podcast, remarks have been made about how remarkable it is that he is without facial scarring. Other fans say it was clear from the first that he did not have facial burns. What is included in this post is 2 screengrabs where you can see his face at the hospital & a very quick edit of that day in the hospital. 
    • adrnyc
      As The World Turns Discussion Thread

      By adrnyc · Posted

      Put me in the LOVE KMH camp. As a poster alluded to above, her detractors seem to come from people who first experienced the 80s Emily actress. And that's often the case with soaps, myself included. I enjoy the original actor so much that I just never take to the recast. However, KMH played Emily far longer than the original - for almost 20 years - and when she had great material, she was great. I get the sense she didn't like playing the whiny oh-woe-is-me Emily which was all the material she got from about 1996 until she took over the Intruder in late '99/early '00 and got to play a stronger kiss-ass woman who didn't care what anyone thought of her. (Some would call that a bitch but, if a man was in that role, he'd just be called a smart and savvy businessman.) Her relationship with Hal was great. The transformation was done realistically and I thoroughly enjoyed those years the best out of all. Once the writers decided to break up those two, they went back to writing Emily half the time as whiny and pathetic. I preferred when the writers made her stronger.
    • alwaysAMC
      Guiding Light Discussion Thread

      By alwaysAMC · Posted

      Hahaha - I do. I've always been the type, though, that can't miss anything. I get FOMO, so I'll not skip episodes or fast forward anything. There are only a few TV shows I've dropped because they got so bad vs. sticking it out to the end.  The promise that GL 1997 is better is what keeps me going. I especially want to see the fallout of Blake's lie about her twins and then Annie's descent which I believe won Watros's Emmy.
    • bboy875
      Guiding Light Discussion Thread

      By bboy875 · Posted

      Rita's rape is an episode i constantly search on YouTube hoping one day that it will show up. I always feel like I may have seen it, but I was only 6 at the time and can never figure any of the things I have vague recollection of 
    • alwaysAMC
      Guiding Light Discussion Thread

      By alwaysAMC · Posted

      Ahh good, thank you both!
    • JAS0N47
      Ratings from the 70's

      By JAS0N47 · Posted

      FROM THE VAULT: NON-SOAP DAYTIME RATINGS: HIGHLIGHTS FROM FEBRUARY 1973 & MAY 1973:

      Please register in order to view this content

        FROM THE VAULT: NON-SOAP DAYTIME RATINGS: HIGHLIGHTS FROM AUGUST 1973 & NOVEMBER 1973:
    • bboy875
      Guiding Light Discussion Thread

      By bboy875 · Posted

      The rape was in 1979 after they were married. Blake was the result of Holly cheating with him while she was married to Ed. I believe she was born in 1975. 
    • DeeVee
      Guiding Light Discussion Thread

      By DeeVee · Posted

      No. Ed and Holly were married and having problems. She had an affair with Roger and that's when Christina--Blake--was conceived. The rape happened much later, after Holly and Roger were married.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

  I accept