Jump to content

June 30 - July 4, 2008


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 182
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

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)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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; (B) 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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

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

    • Really an excellent point. I'm worried about Derek but he's not working. The Duprees being too good somehow ... well, if they say it instead of be it, okay yes, I would worry but as long as they keep on being good, geeze, that's something to celebrate, not worry!!!  Party on?!
    • I blame Mitch.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I agree. For now. I am sure in a year's time...a new family (or old) will start to appear on the show. 
    • There's some irony in Philip being forgiven, because it forces everyone to admit that Victor was wrong to change his will.  Everyone, eventually including Xander, (I presume), seems to think it was wrong for Victor to divide his estate in Xander's favor.  I appreciated Stephanie forgiving Philip, because she's got no skin in that game.  But, Belle's line about Philip missing Xander because he misses Bo did not ring true.  I think Philip would be sad if Bo dies, but I think he's more concerned currently about Xander. I am enjoying this EJ mystery so much that I am hereby taking a vow not to read spoilers.  I am also vowing — for the last time — to stop harping on this, but: the concept of a “sepsis treatment” remains absurd. Hospitals prevent sepsis through vigilant infection control; once sepsis sets in, it causes multiple organ failures. Treatment involves supporting each failing organ individually. The notion that a single medication could magically reverse organ failure is medically laughable. However, I like the contrast of Kim going through cancer, which is incurable in their universe.  Kayla's comment on the health of both of her siblings was both heartbreaking and an interesting twist.  MBE is also totally underrated.  She is carrying the weight of so many stories.   And, I like the use of Kayla as an audience surrogate.  She's arguably the most "real" person in Salem. Kayla isn't psychic, she wasn't SORASed, she's not a billionaire, and she doesn't have a bionic eye.  So, I enjoy that we get her perspective of the nuttiness that surrounds her. However, I don't get what gives her the authority to turn down EJ's offer.  I understand that they need a hospital figurehead to show us scenes of the competition to buy the hospital.  But, unless the entire administration has been let go, the Chief of Staff wouldn't make those choices.
    • But why worry about something that might not happen? Right now, most things revolve around the Duprees. We have no idea if or how long that will continue. For now, it's working.
    • The Duprees not having any staff is a bugbear for me. They've included the background staff at the Country Club but no one at the Dupree home. Even just an extra bringing in a tray of food/drinks or responding to a request from Anita would suffice.
    • Shut up, Dante and Lois.  I actually don't mind this particular soap trope, but in the context of this storyline, it just feels forced and unnecessary. If anything, this Dante/Gio tension needed to begin months ago. Plus, this storyline, in general, isn't doing Lois any favors either.  Emma comforting Gio was really sweet though. It's definitely time for the two of them to have their first kiss. And, Joss playing Secret Agent Barbie will just never work.
    • Note to makeup - Smitty’s eyebrows, bad clamshell look.  

      Please register in order to view this content

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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