Jump to content

Primetime Ratings: 2/8/07


R!ck

Recommended Posts

  • Members

February 8, 2007

Total Viewers

Grey’s Anatomy 25.0 million

CSI 22.3 million

Survivor: Fiji 16.8 million

Shark 14.6 million

Ugly Betty 14.3 million

ER 11.5 million

Men in Trees 10.9 million

My Name is Earl 9.6 million

The Office 8.9 million

Scrubs 6.2 million

Til Death 5.0 million

30 Rock 5.1 million

Smallville 4.7 million

The War at Home 4.4 million

The O.C. 3.6 million

Supernatural 2.8 million

Households

Grey’s Anatomy 16.0/23

CSI 14.2/21

Shark 10.1/16

Ugly Betty 9.9/15

Survivor: Fiji 9.6/15

ER 8.4/13

Men in Trees 7.3/12

My Name is Earl 6.4/10

The Office 6.0/9

Scrubs 4.5/6

Smallville 3.8/6

30 Rock 3.7/5

Til Death 3.3/5

The War at Home 3.0/4

Supernatural 2.4/4

The O.C. 2.3/3

Adults 18-49

Grey’s Anatomy 10.7/25

CSI 6.8/16

Survivor: Fiji 5.8/15

ER 4.8/13

Ugly Betty 4.7/12

The Office 4.4/11

My Name is Earl 4.2/11

Shark 4.1/11

Men in Trees 4.1/11

Scrubs 3.1/7

30 Rock 2.5/6

Til Death 2.0/5

The War at Home 1.9/5

Smallville 1.8/5

The O.C. 1.6/4

Supernatural 1.2/3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 7
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

wow Men In Tree's is giving Shark a run for its money...interesting..My only complaint, i wish NBC would be higher...they have an excellent lineup...their comedies all are brilliant..i really hope 30 Rock is renewed for next year...the show just gets better and better..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree Adam, I think NBC should put it out to pasture. Or just do a half season of 13 shows ala cable shows, and run it midseason 07-08

11.5 million viewers opposite two first season shows (Men in Trees/Shark) is not good at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Isn't ER having a better ratings season then it has in recent years? Probably because Without A Trace moved but also because of creative changes? I doubt NBC will give up on a proven hit (even if it is aging). It is a franchise (like L&O). Also, NBC has to think about the all mighty dollar. Thursday is the last TV day before the weekend and advertisers try to covet that day before weekend shopping. If NBC has a hit why would it risk losing all those viewers and dollars for an unproven show? Especially given the fact that NBC hasn't been able to produce a solid hit drama (except Heros) in almost 5 years.

I stopped watching ER 7 years ago but I know the show does bring on new viewers, and it does have a built in audience who might pop in from time to time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Dave, You make good points. Here are the numbers for ER since 2000

#2 2000-2001 22.4 million

#3 2001-2002 22.1 million

#7 2002-2003 20.1 million

#8 2003-2004 19.5 million

#16 2004-2005 15.5 million

#30 2005-2006 12.4 million

ER was averaging 14.8 million viewers through November sweeps, which is up quite a bit from last season, but since the show returned from winter hiatus, it's been in freefall. For the first 5 episodes of 2007 it's only pulling 11.6 million viewers. I don't know if that's good enough to warrant renewal? I'm sure it will, because it's still getting fairly good demos.

IMO, the only change to NBC's thursday night lineup will be the cancellation of 30 Rock, in favour of a more compatible comedy to go with Earl, The Office, and Scrubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • A kind angel has added both episodes to the vault (UK Diva TV broadcast version). 
    • Yes, I think that is the most likely situation.  TPTB were unhappy with the offer(s) they got from the tourism board in Finland, and decided the trip was going to be too expensive for P&G/NBC to finance alone.   I would also speculate a similar situation likely occurred a few years later with the planned location shoot in Egypt, which was also cancelled after the storyline had already started, and changed to Arizona.  
    • What else? #May4th

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • In my usual account on my most used video hosting site with the video title  DAYS 1-8-15 Will & Paul Sex This is an edit I began when I was first teaching myself to edit & at that time I couldn't make it do what I wanted it to do. I pulled it up & finished it this morning. 
    • Or Megan is shot as retaliation for Dave's unpaid gambling debts...while Julie confesses she's the biological mother of Special Guest Star Barry Bostwick's little boy.
    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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