November 17-21, 2008

[amazing7]

I know that I've switched over from AMC to Y&R, because Y&R's writing and storylines are great. I can't wait to get home from work to watch.

[LoyaltoAMC]

All of the ABC shows stayed above a 2.0 in the HHs, which is a good thing for them. Y&R is probably the best soap on the air right now and deserves those numbers. There's still some stuff in the B plotlines that just isn't working, but their A stories (Kay/Marge and the Newmans, to a lesser extent IMO) are kicking ass. Placing veteran actors in front burner stories that have to do with family and which play on history is the way to gain viewer interest and raise ratings for the long-term...not plot-driven, gimmicky, transparent stunts that are nothing more than quick fixes. The other soaps could take a lesson from Y&R. This is the type of stuff AMC should be doing. It kills me because they still have key vets and a shitload of history (from before 2005) to draw upon that, ridiculously, goes untapped. I don't want to see stunts and gimmicks. I want to see intergenerational stories that draw on history, and Pratt, by his own design or Frons', is just not doing that IMO. Sorry for the venting, but the wasted potential on AMC and some of the others is a travesty.

[shawn Perez]

i don't believe that. if that was the case GH would have scored big with the constant cliffhangers all last week and the week before that..it just sucks that ABC is doing there best to try and gain new viewers..sadly the population of people who watch soaps is very small. the majority prefer the Y&R written format of character driven storylines. romance with longterm couples. A well balanced out soap. stuff that requires a good enough budget. i feels as though with the budget constants going on at ABC and cutting cost. it seems as though it's gonna be hard for them to compete with bell soaps no matter what show is more entertaining or doing quality wise..which brings me to GH/OLTL. i personally think they dominated Y&R/B&B as far as sweeps goes aswell as keeping a show edgy.. i mean yeah sure the casual primetime viewer will probably tune in if they see a promo on ABC that they find interesting. but why go for the viewers that will easily quit the soap when things slow down? considering those viewers are usually prone to the fast pace action of what they watch on a weekly basis compared to how daytime operates. smart thing to do in this desperate economic times is to try and draw back the old viewers who stayed loyal. but like i said. with the state soaps are in right now. it's nearly impossible. the damage has already been done.

[Angela]

Doesn't seem very smart, does it? Two words: Brian Frons.

Thanks for the ratings Toups.

[JaneAusten]

Ok I have to ask a question. I keep hearing how much better shape ABC is because they own their soaps where CBS has to in essense lease theirs. So now ABC has budgetary issues and CBS doesn't? I don't buy it has anything to do with money. CBS had an article in bloomberg last month talking about cuts they were going to have to make. Unless the Bells just have an huge amount of extra money.

What I do see with Y&R and BB and not on AMC or GH is better cast use. I doubt Y&R and BB goes over their minimums for any of the cast where GH and AMC always have the 6 top airhogs going over their mins constantly, which means they have to constantly pay them over and above their contracts. Maybe t has no bearing, but it tells me the Bells can better manage their soaps from a business standpoint than ABC is able to.

[shawn Perez]

budget on soaps is a money issue what are you talking about? it means a lesser cast. no balanced s/l's. actors being backburned. possible popular actor firings. cheap sets. hiring cheaper paid actors. a money issue is a major problem and concerns many people that there favorite soaps could face cancellation because of it..here's an article i found highlighted in blue that should explain what soaps are currently going through. it's a perfect well written explanation. i highly doubt Y&R is suffering financially if you look at there international budget.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.tv...10e001b68a0f223

40% cut at Days

up to 50% cut at ABC

unknown (but obvious) cuts at ATWT and GL

It is interesting to see how each network is handling this. Days is

firing the best-paid players, cutting the rest in half, and featuring

young (cheap) newbies most prominently.

At ABC, so far, the strategy is more varied. GH has culled their cast

down to a tiny (but not cheap) crew. OLTL, in the recent past, seems

to have spent lavishly on high profile returns. I don't actually see

evidence of recent cuts there. AMC, it seems, may try to accomplish

the cuts with paring down salaries, but not making major changes on

screen.

GL and ATWT have used different strategies. ATWT is minimally using

vets, but it is also recasting legacy characters like crazy (with

cheap newbies), seemingly seeing what will stick. GL has few veterans

now, and they have their much heralded new "production model".

So, there is a fair bit of heterogeneity in how different shows are

experimenting with these cuts.

Only the Bell shows (Y&R and B& are not obviously cutting. During

an earlier Y&R regime (Jack Smith's) we saw versions of the general

strategy: Excess young newbies and neglect of vets, high profile

contract disputes (many contract characters took extended leaves

during difficult negotiations), and use of a very small number of

"umbrella" sets. But all those cost cutting moves now seem to be a

thing of the past. B&B shows little evidence of cuts

either...although they are reported greatly rushing

production...possibly taping only 3-4 days a week. (So, that seems to

be a version of the Port Charles model of budget cuts, without using

all the young 'uns).

It seems Y&R and B&B may be being "protected" by their high foreign

sales. The international syndication dollars may be keeping them

afloat. I know recent attempts to push ABC soaps internationally have

been less successful (a station in France tried to air GH...but

cancelled it within weeks). Y&R, in particular, also has the most

diversified set of US revenue (It is Soapnet's highest rated show, and

it streams (legally, with embedded ads) in the US on hulu, fancast,

msn TV, youtube, and cbs.com, and in Canada on Global TV online or on-

demand--I'm not sure which). These revenue sources all seem to be

helping, because Y&R doesn't seem so "broke". Indeed, in an interview

released yesterday with TVGuide.ca, Christian Leblanc compared the Y&R

and ATWT taping experiences:

> Former ATWT star Christian LeBlanc (Michael, Y&R) tells The Suds Report he’s stunned at how actors like Michael Park

> (Jack) and Maura West (Carly) deliver sensational performances in spite of P&G’s laborious production machine. “I’m not

> sure if I could do it everyday. Y&R is like a posh movie studio compared to what they deal with over there,” he says.

http://tvguide.sympatico.msn.ca/The+Suds+R...008/Soaps/Sud...

The overwhelming impression, though, from all these cuts is that the

end is near...very, very near. When this kind of austerity--which is

clearly affecting the quality of what we see on screen--becomes so

widespread, it seems to remove all doubt about the sustainability of

the industry. This seems like last-gasp desperation moves before the

business model completely falls apart.

[JaneAusten]

Thanks for posting . That was very informative.

[Rakesh]

Thanks Toups.

Yay for GL. lol

[Soapsuds]

Glad to see Y&R go up again. It is truly deserved. Happy to see ATWT go up too!

[Supersage]

It is VERY pivotal. No one will go on record from CBS or Telenext/PGP, but the edict has been handed down: The ratings NEED to increase before the end of March to a certain level (rumor has it CBS wants it to be 1.7/1.8 by then). It is very possible that GL can make it to this level, but it is a hard road ahead. Former viewers who used to watch will be hard pressed to return, even with two key actors returning. New viewers simply don't care for the filming technique (believe it or not, the younger demos of 12-24 DO NOT care for the filming technique). Hey, I know the old days are gone, but that doesn't do anything for any viewer.

If GL goes, ATWT will follow. Whether it is an unspoken clause or written, both PGP soaps are linked together, for better or worse. There are a few people in the upper echelon of CBS that say that they aren't developing anything new for daytime, but most will willingly tell you they have people in mind for a talkfest that would blow The View out of the water. And it would make more money than ATWT and GL combined. To sweeten the pot, this would air before TPIR in the mornings, strengthening that dinosaur and the afternoon lineup of Y&R and B&B. And what would make this even better? CBS would hand over ATWT and GL's time slots to the local affiliates, something most have wanted for years (the South being the sole exception).

I would love it if GL came back and became the best soap on TV, but the time for its survival has come and gone. "Someone" wants GL to be the "canary in the mine" so badly that they are willing to change it completely from the soap it should be, to the experimental daytime whatever CBS wants it to be. Either be the soap viewers want, or give it a proper burial. Don't leave it hanging out there for the vultures to pick its bones clean.

[marceline]

There's nothing wrong with pursuing new viewers. What are they supposed to do? Keep placating the same small customer base until they finally die of old age? And honestly everytime I see someone talk about what the "majority" of potential soap watchers want, I wonder where they're getting their information from. The audience for soaps - for any form of entertainment actually - isn't nearly as monolithic as people want to believe.

And to answer your question about why go for viewers that will easily quit the soap when things slow down, that's the reality of business now. Soaps died because they chose to ignore reality.

[Soapsuds]

Toups, do you have the rest of the ratings?

[shawn Perez]

ITA. there's nothing wrong with pursuing new viewers. honestly out of all the soaps GH is likely the only one that has the ability to succeed. especially with how the overall show is formatted. it's the bad reputation that soaps got long ago from your typical stereotypes that makes it hard for those viewers to slightly be interested. the way i see soaps surviving is if it were to be moved to a regular network channel plain and simple. atleast there producers/writers wont be limited like they are in daytime.

[Angela]

Aiming to get new viewers with stunts that drive away the viewers who watch every week is dumb as has been shown time and again for years. The new viewers don't stay for long after the stunts and then you've alienated some of the viewers who were pretty much staying no matter what with more plot/ratings-jump driven stunts or drivel.

The shows should try to build from the audience that stays with them. Good writing keeps the old audience and in my opinion would probably bring in new audience that will want to faithfully watch, stunts don't. Die with dignity, at least. It's not just 100,000 80 year olds watching the soaps, that's not what they're working with.

Frons/ABC/NBC/CBS can do whatever they want but the end result is going to be the same, at least with ABC/Frons choice of attack. They can do stunts every 6 months and then 3-4 months later hit an all new low in viewers until they're officially cancelled. Just keep on doing what doesn't work.

[marceline]

Why the assumption that stunts drive the "loyal" viewers away? Sweeps have always been filled with stunts. Always. That's what sweeps are. But how many times have we seen people post "I'm going to keep watching until the day the show goes off the air!" Those people by their own definition don't matter because they'll take whatever they're given.

I don't believe these shows can succeed. But I'm fascinated by the mentality that soaps shouldn't be expected to adapt to changing realities because only the loyal fans really matter.