Mind you....no offense to anyone here who happens to be a Nielsen viewer. I don't hate you....I hate the system.

I went back and looked at last year's ratings for this year with the whole for 4th July / Wimbeldon stuff and noticed that DAYS had a horribly bad week - it dropped .4. The rest of the soaps were mixed. That being said... here are my predictions:

1. YR 3.6 (SAME)

2. BB 2.6 (+.1)

3. GH 2.1 (SAME)

4. ATWT 2.0 (+.1)

4. OLTL 2.0 (SAME)

6. AMC 1.8 (-.1)

6. DAYS 1.8 (-.1)

8. GL 1.5 (SAME)

I think there needs to be a company that comes in and challenges Nielsen. Why should Nielsen be the premiere standard for ratings? They're outdated and can't keep up with the times. I think the new company should be inclusive of EVERYONE who wants to participate (barring those who can't participate in Nielsen due to whatever rules).

I'm tired of a select group of bitches deciding what shows are canceled and what shows succeed.

A ratings system that lets anyone who wants to participate do so would not be a representative sample of the US. In other words, the ratings would be less

accurate than Nielsen's.

Maariana de la noche? I don't knw her, but LOLI looked it up on IMDB

No, I looked it up. The telenovela was Destilando Amor.

A ratings system that lets anyone who wants to participate do so would not be a representative sample of the US. In other words, the ratings would be less

accurate than Nielsen's.

I don't see why we need a representative sample of the US. Nielsen viewers don't represent me. I watched Another World Port Charles regularly, I'm sure more people watched Port Charles and Another World than those counted in the Nielsen ratings. That's the thing that bothers me the most. If people didn't watch the shows, when they're canceled millions of people wouldn't campaign to bring it back. The system is unfair and inaccurate IMO.

I don't see why we need a representative sample of the US. Nielsen viewers don't represent me. I watched Another World Port Charles regularly, I'm sure more people watched Port Charles and Another World than those counted in the Nielsen ratings. That's the thing that bothers me the most. If people didn't watch the shows, when they're canceled millions of people wouldn't campaign to bring it back. The system is unfair and inaccurate IMO.

We need a representative sample, because otherwise the ratings wouldn't be accurate, lol. As I've said before, statistically speaking, the Nielsen ratings are pretty accurate, especially when talking about households. If they weren't at all accurate, we'd expect huge fluctuations for the ratings of certain shows every time the sample (Nielsen households) was changed. But we don't see huge fluctuations when that happens at all.

No, the total for Al Diablo comes to around 5 million viewers in hispanic/latino only.

That is very helpful. Still very impressive.

We need a representative sample, because otherwise the ratings wouldn't be accurate, lol. As I've said before, statistically speaking, the Nielsen ratings are pretty accurate, especially when talking about households. If they weren't at all accurate, we'd expect huge fluctuations for the ratings of certain shows every time the sample (Nielsen households) was changed. But we don't see huge fluctuations when that happens at all.

I agree with you.

Ryan makes an important point that SMALL constituencies may be underrepresented in the Neilsen sample if the sample is not large enough.

Honestly, though, Neilsen is about the best we can do FOR NOW. I see massive improvements here in the near future due to (a) counted downloads watched via TV; ( bi-directional DVRs that transmit data back to the counters; and © purchased downloads watched through things like the I-tunes and Netflix converter boxes.

In the future, we'll get MUCH closer to a 100% real time count (not perfectly...but MUCH closer). At that point, even small constituencies like the ones Ryan belongs to will be counted. This will enable the networks to make more informed decisions about whether these small but accurately counted niches represent viable groups to program for.

There is another thing...as computer-enabled downloads become more popular and universal, the INFRASTRUCTURE for transmission gets much cheaper. You need to digitize and store programs and store/serve them, but you don't need to maintain a "network" or make deals with cable/satellite firms.

So, I see the future as very bright here for viewers of vintage. It will soon get more affordable to provide that material to small niche audiences.

I wonder how ABC is going to do now that they cut back the previews

I think that the Nielsen's are fine. I don't think that it doesn't represent people who watch shows with poor ratings. Rather it reflects that the individual is in the minority that enjoys that particular show. After all, quality doesn't always mean good ratings.

I also don't think that the counting the DVR and Web viewers is going to make a significant change in the ratings. There are only so many hours in the day for people to watch tv.

There is another thing...as computer-enabled downloads become more popular and universal, the INFRASTRUCTURE for transmission gets much cheaper. You need to digitize and store programs and store/serve them, but you don't need to maintain a "network" or make deals with cable/satellite firms.

We'll have to wait to see how that will all shake out though as internet providers now want to charge for bandwidth usage, and Time Warner is already testing that pricing structure in TX. So how many people will watch movies and tv shows online, knowing it will cost them more money; not just paying itunes, or netflix or whoever for the video but additional costs for the bandwidth? Even on "free" sites, like ABC, people still won't want to pay for bandwidth especially if they include ads.

My Prediction

1. YR 3.7 (+.1)

2. BB 2.6 (+.1)

3. OLTL 2.1 (+.1)

4. GH 2.1 (SAME)

5. DAYS 2.0 (+.1)

6. ATWT 1.8 (-1)

7. AMC 1.8 (-.1)

8. GL 1.7 (+.2)

Edited July 11, 200817 yr by Soapfan1

We'll have to wait to see how that will all shake out though as internet providers now want to charge for bandwidth usage, and Time Warner is already testing that pricing structure in TX. So how many people will watch movies and tv shows online, knowing it will cost them more money; not just paying itunes, or netflix or whoever for the video but additional costs for the bandwidth? Even on "free" sites, like ABC, people still won't want to pay for bandwidth especially if they include ads.

Yeah, I thought about that after I posted. I guess even Sprint (which had been offering one-tiered data) is already going to tiered data on its' cell phones. So, you're right, user fees will likely vary with volume used...and that could have a chilling effect.

My predictions.

1. Y&R 3.5 (-1)

2. B&B 2.4 (-1)

3. GH 2.1

4. DAYS 2.0 (+1)

4. ATWT 2.0 (+1)

6. AMC 1.9

7. GL 1.7 (+2)

8. OLTL 0.1 (-1.9)

hope b&b goes upppppppp