February 5-9, 2007

[SteveFrame]

Phoenix, I know exactly what you are saying. As much as I hate McTavish or even Guza in a way I admire them too because they have the balls to make tough decisions, stick to them, and write an exciting story to disquise the bad decision. Corday has spongy balls if you ask me instead of iron ones because even when ratings would go up with the SSK story he ended up not having the balls to stick with the story that I know was originally designed. It was changed.

As bad as I think McTavish is and as bad as I disliked her decisions with undoing Erica's abortion and then this year killing Dixie - she took bad decisions and turned them into ratings successes.

last year she took a story that everybody hated and made the reveal come in the middle of a big event (the explosion) and Janet's reign of terror. What happened - even though people were mad about the Josh story - they tuned in and AMC rose in the ratings.

This year as already pointed out she kills off Dixie in the midst of the SSK story and ABC heavily hyped in mags and TV promos that the killer would strike again and made it appear to be Kendall or Babe - what did viewers do - they tuned in even though they were mad.

Fans and cast mates get mad at Guza and Phelps for firing Brad Maule last year and killing him in Feb. This year they do the same thing with Stuart Damon. Ratings have gone up. GH's are higher than they have been since 2005.

Corday and Sheffer - esp. Corday - have got to develop balls of steel and decide what is best for the show.

Now I am not condoning firing every vet because I am still made about Damon and McClain and Barr being fired. Even Eileen Davidson being fired. They are not popular decisions.

But Days may have to sacrifice one star to create an exciting story. A big risk would have been (if he had to revive Stefano) to have had Stefano to return for a brief stint - stir up the pot - and finally write a dramatic exit for Stefano by having him killed. At the same time he could have passed the torch to EJ and EJ could have sought revenge for for his father's death. I know Mascolo wouldn't have played the game, but hey they could offered him a contract and then fired him like they did Ashford after 3 or 4 months. Now I didn't want Stefano to rise again, but it would have been an exciting opening story. Stefano could have worked closely with EJ, the Brady-DiMera feud could be fully explored and climaxed with Stefano's death. Almost every one in Salem could have been a suspect.

Oh well a boy can dream.

And DaysFan I know Days is done at NBC no matter what but if Days wants to be picked up by another network - the demos and HH's have got to look better than they are right now.

[PhoenixRising05]

I agree completely although I am totally against what AMC and GH did. I can't advocate for re-writing history just to have some big event. I will give GH credit for this although this is the first sweeps stunt they have done that has had a massive impact on the ratings. The others were minimal and back down after sweeps. I am curious to see what happens this time.

I think Hogan wants to take risks but we all know Corday worries about fanbase backlash. I agree that doing that with Stefano would be great. I don't think Days should kill a major character. They have lost enough familiar faces and killing a major character may turn too many people off. The other soaps have more benefits then Days have, the biggest being the fanbase problems are nowhere close to the level they are at Days. You have people that nitpicked that J&M scenes during November and December were too short. I mean, the fanbases tear Days down for every little thing. I can see why Corday is cautious.

I wish Corday would realize that there comes a time when you have to do break with what you have done and just go for the jugular. The right writer is there to do it. I think it's time for him to think about the show and not one couple, character, fanbase, etc. Go for it and, if some fanbases tune out, so be it. The fanbases don't count too much in rating anyway. You need to get the casual fans and the fans that want to be entertained and want drama. You have to appease old fans but I think that is part of why Days has suffered. They are too worried about the fanbases and constatly backtrack to appease them. That can't happen anymore. The ante has to be upped. I am not as big on GH as others but that is upping the ante. I hate losing SD but doing what they are now is working because they are including most of the cast and not just the mob squad. I think that is why this sweeps GH is making a bigger impact with more characters being involved. Days needs to do that but NBC is really holding them back alot too. That is why I wish Days would move because the budger will prevent Days from doing anything like that. There are other things they can do but nothing like GH can.

[jfung79]

Has anyone ever done any research or stories on why soap ratings seem to be rising among Men 18+ (apparently true for EVERY soap -- all + signs!), when they are even or falling for female demographics?

Or is this trend just a fluke for this particular week? I don't remember if prior weeks have also generally shown year-to-year growth among men.

[R!ck]

More and more stay at home dads?

It is odd that versus last year at this time soaps are up 1.4 million in men, and down .8 million in Women 18-49?

[Darcy]

I'm sure I'm missing something obvious but can anyone explain the following to me:

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2007

5.(5) AMC: Monday: 2.8/3,415,000

6.(8) DAYS: Monday: 2.5/3,349,000

7.(6) ATWT: Monday: 2.5/3,211,000

How did AMC have only 66,000 more viewers than Days yet AMC's rating was .3 higher? Especially when you consider that Days had 138,000 more viewers than ATWT and yet their ratings were tied?

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2007

5.(5) ATWT: Wednesday: 2.5/3,336,000

6.(8) OLTL: Wednesday: 2.6/3,331,000

7.(6) DAYS: Wednesday: 2.6/3,262,000

How did ATWT have more viewers than OLTL and DAYS, yet their rating was .1 less than both of the other shows?

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2007

4.(7) DAYS: Thursday: 2.5/3,398,000

5.(4) AMC: Thursday: 2.6/3,355,000

6.(6) OLTL: Thursday: 2.5/3,286,000

How did AMC get a higher rating than DAYS when they had 43,000 less viewers (and DAYS tied with OLTL who had 112,000 less viewers)?

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2007

2.(2) B&B: Friday: 3.4/4,294,000

3.(3) GH: Friday: 3.1/4,238,000

Why was B&B's rating .3 higher than GH's when they had only 56,000 more viewers?

5.(5) AMC: Friday: 2.5/3,372,000

6.(7) ATWT: Friday: 2.6/3,297,000

Why was AMC's rating lower that ATWT when AMC had 75,000 more viewers?

[KBT]

SteveFrame, Phoenix, CSW, Rick, daysfan, Kevc1980 all have great points as do others about DAYS. DAYS needs a huge event IMO and have said this since last November and like SteveFrame pointed out its been 2 boring sweep periods for DAYS. Maybe thats why DAYS budegt is so low, it doesn't perform during sweeps like it should. DAYS has always seem to do that though, so I am not sure thats a good argument. From memory DAYS usually NEVER does anything for November Sweeps, but always goes all out for December. But DAYS is usually great during February Sweeps, but this year has lacked big time. I have realyl enjoyed this current week, but its a sweeps month and I just wish DAYS would go all out, involve all the vets, and just see how the numbers look. I am very disappointed in these numbers and hope DAYS steps it up soon.

[Ponz]

Darcy: This is just a flying guess but I think the HH numbers refer to share of viewers obtained for a given timeslot. So if two soaps air at different times, it's possible for Soap X to get a higher HH rating than Soap Y despite drawing few viewers (ie. because Soap X picked up a greater share for their timeslot than Soap Y).

Rick, Lskreet, SteveFrame etc. can correct me if I'm wrong.

[Ilovemydays]

"A single national ratings point represents 1%, or 1,102,000 households for the 2006-07 season. Share is the percentage of television sets in use tuned to a specific program."

Sorry Darcy, I don't know why the ratings appear off.

[SteveFrame]

example: 1. Y&R 4.6/15

Ponz, This is my understanding of things. The first number after Y&R is the HH number. Each point accounts for so many households. I forget what the exact total is right now. So that counts how many actual households are tuned in at a certain time.

The second number is their share number. That represents the share of the audience that is tuning into Y&R at that time. I think that is for all the channels that are counted.

So with Y&R they had whatever 4.6 households actually comes out too, and a 15 share of the total audience.

That is my understanding. Maybe Toups or Rick or someone might have how many households each point represents anymore. I know that they recently raised it.

ETA: ilovedays and I were posting at the same time. Thanks ilovedays for that info.

[King]

I think DAYS does need a big sweeps event. I think we do need a gimmick, but a well written one. History proves DAYS fans liek gimmicks and big stunts - they just got sick of JER's. DAYS hasn't been across the board traditional in 15 years. It is a hard adjustment to make.

[SteveFrame]

Darcy, the first rating only measures as Ponz pointed out the number of households tuned in at the time. That does not measure at all how many viewers are tuned it. The HH number is one measurement and has been the defining measurement for most advertisers because they want to reach the most households.

Now each one of those houses might have a different number of viewers that count. So Nielsen keeps up with that with some averaging number. Some households might be a single dwelling house so that one person represents a certain number of viewers. Another household might have 2 viewers and another might have 6 viewers.

But the ratings are ususally ranked in order by number of households because for a lot of houses the number of viewers changes from time to time and is not an absolute number.

For instance our Nielsen rep (when we were a Nielsen family) told us that at the time I had 5 people in the household. For the living room TV whatever channel it was on they counted 2 viewers at all times for that TV because that is what we listed as an average in there. Well many times there might have only been 1 in there and sometimes there might have been 3.

The advertisers like the HH number because it is a number that is not averaged. It is definitely counted while the viewership number is still a hard one that without diaries and a different type of system they have to average at times.

I hear in the future at some point there will be a system where buttons will be pushed to account for the number of viewers but unless they have come out with them since I was a Nielsen household they are still doing it by the averages.

[SteveFrame]

Kirk I know that Days has never done sweeps or bought into the sweeps thing, but I feel that right now they should. This to me is not the time for the same old same old. They need to shake it up and take a risk.

I don't want to argue that Days throws out everything that it has done in the past - no hold on to some of it - but the thing of not doing sweeps and etc. can be changed. They need to shine when the advertisers are most watching. Show the advertisers that they can beat their competition even when the competition is putting out it's best.

Days to me right now just can't play it safe. Safe is going to keep them at the status quo, and I am not sure that even the status quo is going to make them appealing to another network right now. Especially if the numbers and the demos keep doing what they did this week.

[PhoenixRising05]

A gimmick is all fine and good but high ratings for two to three weeks won't help Days in the long run. It needs to be consistent and they need to build up numbers, like they were slowly doing in November/December. They need to get that greatness back. GH's latest sweep stunt is working because they were already on minor high going into this. This is why this sweeps stunt has been huge for them because the show was doing well even before it. Days needs to am up the stories first and give us consistent action and drama. We are getting consistently good writing and good day to day episodes but it's nothing gripping. It's not enough to get the numbers, unlike December was.

There can be no more slow periods that last longer then a week. Things have to happen consistently. Once the stories get going and we get more movement and action, then they can build to something big. Now it won't GH big because they don't have the budget for that with NBC. They can still do a big event though, just not at that very high level.

[King]

The gimmick has to be well-written as I said. And the rest of the stories have to be good. All of the stories can't climax simultaneously as Hoagie has been doing.

[Darcy]

Thanks everyone for your answers. I'm still a bit confused but it is clearer. So what does the HH number mean - is it the number of households in millions viewing the show - so 2.5 would mean 2.5 million households?

Also, to clarify if you look at the daily's for ATWT:

ATWT

Monday: 2.5/3,211,000

Tuesday: 2.6/3,312,000

Wednesday: 2.5/3,336,000

On Wednesday, ATWT had a lower rating than Tuesday's show but Wednesday had more viewers. Is this because different Nielsen viewers were watching on different TV's that equated to more people? If so, then the Nielsen are even screwier than I thought.