May 12-16, 2008

[Ryan]

Congrats to all the shows that went up or held steady.

OLTL

[KevC1980]

Glad Days got a 217,000 bump in viewers, just weird that it didn't result in a bump in 18-49 or HH..But a rise is a rise..And congrats to OLTL..They are providing the best sweeps of all the soaps, so i'm happy to see them with gains..

[SoapQueen89]

Finally OLTL goes UP and it's so well deserved!!

[dragonflies]

Really? Is that why AMC surpassed GH quite a few times in 2006 and early 2007?

[Toups]

Thanks for catching that!

I corrected it.

[DaytimeFan]

Y&R's numbers are absolutely horrible.

B&B is pretty steady.

DAYS...GO DAYS

P&G's soaps are in the crapper

ABC Daytime is a joke.

[shawn Perez]

Lol..I'd like to see a record of this proof?..i don't remember much about 2006..but early 2007? wasn't that around the time when GH gained a 3.2 because of the metro court crisis in feb?...and even before that event started..GH was in the 2.7's/2.8's...in the meantime AMC was surfing around the 2.5 spot. also let it be known that no matter how well AMC/OLTL is doing. brian frons will always put more efforts into GH above all else.

go days? yeah right..LOL.. DOOL is even more of a joke. i'm just waiting to see next weeks ratings after reading the news of joseph mascolo firing.

[Roman]

Really?

That says something about AMC then.

[Ryan]

Joe's firing will have no impact on DAYS ratings, seeing as how Stefano's been in a coma for months and hasn't been seen in a while.

[shawn Perez]

it's the principle of how it was done. just because he wasn't seen on-screen for months doesn't mean longtime fans will take it lightly that a core character that's been on the show over a decade was fired over the phone..not to mention treated like garbage.

[beachbum]

Be careful what you wish for cause if GH falls they're taking AMC and OLTL with them

[shawn Perez]

Exactly beachbum. i didn't want say it because i would feel like I'm jinxing GH. but great post,. i couldn't agree more.

[Angela]

This is what I found. I don't believe AMC ever surpassed GH in 2007, though - not in viewers and not in rating.

GH

4/17/06.....*3.....2.8.....09.....2) 1.9/12.....4) 3,389,000

4/24/06.....*3.....2.7.....09.....2) 2.0/12.....5) 3,376,000

5/1/06.........3.....2.8.....09...*1) 2.0/13.....3) 3,536,000

5/8/06.........3.....2.9.....10...*1) 2.1/13.....4) 3,564,000

5/15/06.....*3.....2.8.....09.....2) 2.1/13.....4) 3,468,000

5/22/06.......3.....2.8.....09.....2) 2.0/12.....3) 3,427,000

5/29/06.....*4.....2.7.....08...*4) 1.8/11.....5) 3,398,000

6/5/06.........3.....2.7.....08...*2) 1.8/11.....3) 3,324,000

6/12/06.......3.....2.7.....08.....2) 1.8/11.....3) 3,454,000

6/19/06.....*4.....2.6.....08.....2) 1.9/11.....5) 3,394,000

6/26/06.....*5.....2.5.....08...*3) 1.7/10.....6) 3,133,000

7/3/06.......*3.....2.5.....08.....3) 1.7/11.....4) 3,293,000

AMC

4/17/06.....*3.....2.8.....10...*3) 1.8/12.....3) 3,477,000 (Tied with GH, more viewers) - Tad sees Dixie.

4/24/06.....*3.....2.7.....10.....3) 1.9/12.....4) 3,447,000 (Tied with GH, more viewers) - JR sees Dixie.

5/1/06.......*4.....2.6.....09.....3) 1.8/12.....4) 3,259,000

5/8/06.........4.....2.8.....10.....3) 2.0/13.....3) 3,591,000 (More viewers) - JR/Kendall "accident" aftermath.

5/15/06.....*3.....2.8.....09...*3) 1.9/12.....3) 3,488,000 (Tied with GH, more viewers)

5/22/06.....*4.....2.6.....09...*4) 1.7/11.....4) 3,246,000

5/29/06.....*4.....2.7.....08...*4) 1.8/11.....4) 3,472,000 (Tied with GH, more viewers)

6/5/06.......*4.....2.6.....09...*2) 1.8/11.....4) 3,290,000

6/12/06.....*5.....2.5.....08...*3) 1.7/11.....5) 3,295,000

6/19/06.....*4.....2.6.....08...*3) 1.8/11.....6) 3,382,000 (Tied with GH, more viewers)

6/26/06.....*3.....2.6.....08...*3) 1.7/10.....5) 3,323,000 (+.1, more viewers) - GH was just sucking that much?

7/3/06.......*3.....2.5.....08.....4) 1.6/10.....5) 3,218,000 (Tied with GH)

[MarkH]

Is this what you want? This is the autocorrelation for All My Children. Spacing isn't preserved well. For the non-statisticians, what this tells us is how related the year-by-year ratings are. So, for ratings that are 1 year apart, the autocorrelation is .913. That means if I know the ratings this year, I can do a pretty good job of predicting what they will be next year. (The best possible autocorrelation is 1.0, the worst possible is 0).

Now, look what happens with a lag of 9 years. Here the autocorrelation is only .231. That means if I know the ratings on a particular year, I can do a pretty lousy job of predicting what they will be nine years later. I _guess_ it speaks to "loyalty". It definitely says the ratings are not a flat line that never change :-).

To really get at loyatly, we would need within subjects data that asks exactly your question: Did you watch last week? Did you watch this week? And we'd need to follow that. That WOULD get at loyalty, and you just KNOW Neilsen and the networks must have that little nugget dug away somewhere.

Autocorrelations

Series:Rating

Box-Ljung Statistic

Lag Autocorr SE Value df Sig.b

1 .913 .154 35.046 1 .000

2 .806 .152 63.134 2 .000

3 .695 .150 84.598 3 .000

4 .623 .148 102.316 4 .000

5 .556 .146 116.843 5 .000

6 .485 .144 128.263 6 .000

7 .402 .141 136.329 7 .000

8 .313 .139 141.368 8 .000

9 .231 .137 144.211 9 .000

10 .138 .135 145.262 10 .000

11 .045 .132 145.379 11 .000

12 -.045 .130 145.498 12 .000

13 -.111 .128 146.259 13 .000

14 -.162 .125 147.942 14 .000

15 -.200 .123 150.616 15 .000

16 -.232 .120 154.347 16 .000

a. The underlying process assumed is independence (white noise).

b. Based on the asymptotic chi-square approximation.

I'll give you two others (from other networks) to compare.

Young and Restless:

(note less "loyalty" by this index)

Autocorrelations

Series:Rating

Box-Ljung Statistic

Lag Autocorrelation Std. Errora Value df Sig.b

1 .753 .160 22.136 1 .000

2 .519 .158 32.991 2 .000

3 .431 .155 40.675 3 .000

4 .383 .153 46.939 4 .000

5 .314 .151 51.288 5 .000

6 .193 .148 52.986 6 .000

7 .160 .146 54.192 7 .000

8 .167 .143 55.556 8 .000

9 .120 .140 56.284 9 .000

10 .014 .138 56.295 10 .000

11 -.083 .135 56.668 11 .000

12 -.117 .132 57.454 12 .000

13 -.152 .130 58.827 13 .000

14 -.186 .127 60.972 14 .000

15 -.180 .124 63.093 15 .000

16 -.174 .121 65.156 16 .000

a. The underlying process assumed is independence (white noise).

b. Based on the asymptotic chi-square approximation.

Finally, Days of Our Lives

Autocorrelations

Series:Rating

Box-Ljung Statistic

Lag Autocorrelation Std. Errora Value df Sig.b

1 .904 .147 37.681 1 .000

2 .785 .146 66.736 2 .000

3 .676 .144 88.829 3 .000

4 .568 .142 104.833 4 .000

5 .439 .140 114.645 5 .000

6 .324 .138 120.149 6 .000

7 .245 .136 123.364 7 .000

8 .172 .134 124.992 8 .000

9 .126 .133 125.896 9 .000

10 .133 .131 126.934 10 .000

11 .137 .129 128.069 11 .000

12 .132 .127 129.156 12 .000

13 .116 .125 130.017 13 .000

14 .084 .122 130.489 14 .000

15 .056 .120 130.709 15 .000

16 .008 .118 130.713 16 .000

a. The underlying process assumed is independence (white noise).

b. Based on the asymptotic chi-square approximation.

[LoyaltoAMC]

It takes a super event for AMC or OLTL to surpass GH (baby switch climax; Nora's husband revealed as gay killer). Y&R's current decline is having a domino effect on the other CBS soaps. People are blaming ATWT's/GL's declines on bad storylines. Stories might be bad, but their decline has more to do with Y&R's fall than anything else. Same with GH...as it falls so do AMC and OLTL.