WHAT? Soapnet's not about soaps anymore? Since when! :-)

Just kidding, but seriously, does this still surprise people? Soapnet hasn't made real soaps a priority in years.

Hey Aaron. It's only been This way around A Year or So. I was Watching Soap Talk in 2005 I think because Melissa Archer who is Natalie on One Life To Live was on there with Her Father and They had An Album They were Promoting that was To Raise Money for Katrina. I just thought about that that would be 3 Years, but I Still Think that it was Very Recent that SoapNet Started Those Movies. Jody

This. Sucks. Major. Ass.

surfthechannel.com is SOOOOOO DOPE!!!!! Check this sucka out.

I'm with JP and MarkH on this one. We may not like what Soapnet is changing into, but clearly this is where they're getting the numbers they need to stay on the air. And the 90210 spin-off point is dead-on right.

I miss AW like you wouldn't believe - but if it was getting a 0.0, it's kinda hard to argue with that. Yes, Nielsen is flawed, but it's the only system that exists.

Was it really getting a 0.0?

I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't have a problem at all with 90210 on SOAPnet. Like you said, it's a soap, so it belongs. My only problem is that SOAPnet likes to overload on so few shows when they have every possible chance to put more in there (and I realize that the name of the game is ratings, but even they have to be bored with the current daytime schedule). I don't have a single problem with OC and OTH either. The problem for me is that OC only made 92 episodes, so it's just a little much to have it on ten times a week. 90210 and MP, sure. It makes sense. But not the other two. That's the time that they could be using to experiment with other things.

YES. This is common on cable networks more and more it seems but it drives me crazy--especially with more and more people having TIVO's etc. It seems insulting--why pay money ofr a channel that shows the same show over and over?

surfthechannel.com is SOOOOOO DOPE!!!!! Check this sucka out.

:o For showing me this, you deserve to have a country named after you.

YES. This is common on cable networks more and more it seems but it drives me crazy--especially with more and more people having TIVO's etc. It seems insulting--why pay money ofr a channel that shows the same show over and over?

So many channels are doing it too! Running a half-hour show back to back is no big deal...it's quite all right with me, actually, especially if it's a show with hundreds and hundreds of episodes (like "Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman" and its 325 episodes), but the idea of running hour-long shows back-to-back always seemed a bit much to me, even if it is something that made lots of episodes. I, for one, LOVE the Hallmark Channel. Absolutely adore it, even though it's programming intentionally skews to the over 60 crowd. But their schedule? From 7am until 2am, they air seven different shows and a movie. Two of the hour-long shows come on FOUR times a day, while all the other hour-longs come on twice a day. "M*A*S*H" comes on four times as well. It's total overkill and I'm not saying that they have to fill the rest of that time with stuff that won't do as well in the ratings, but I think that they should at least change it up every now and then...there are lots of shows that would fit in perfectly with their area of concentration. Same goes for SOAPnet.