December 29, 2008 - January 2, 2009

[brimike]

I'm not saying they haven't gone up in the last three months. They have. But until that second number is in the positives, there's no reason to cheer that loudly. They're gaining back lost viewers, but there's a bigger picture to look at here - and that's how the show looks from year to year. When they start gaining viewers from a year ago, then there's reason to shout from the rooftops.

[SteveFrame]

Toups can probably answer this because right now I cannot find my numbers right now.

But didn't Nielsen change the actual numbers to computer the HH's this year. They do that periodically and I was thinking this was the year they did it. In other words there are more households included per point this year than last.

They did it in 2008 or in 2007 and I cannot find my notes right now.

If it was in 2008, then the comparison of the HH rating for 2008 and 2007 is not going to be completely accurate because even though they may be lower now they could be equal to 2007 in actual households.

[Errol]

Y&R had a 1.8/10 Women 18-49 rating, while B&B had a 1.3/7 on that day. If they counted, their averages for the week would have been higher.

[Cyberologist]

I found this at another board re: how TPTB

look at the ratings e.g.

General Hospital:

Its a bi-monthly look at the last week of the month for the past year.

Week of October 20-24 they had 2.1/1.3/.9

Week of August 25-29 they had 2.1/1.3/.9

Week of June 23-27 they had 2.1/1.5/1.2

Week of April 27 - May 2 they had 2.2/1.5/l.0

Week of February 25-29 they had 2.3/1.6/1.1

If you charted this then there's been virtually NO loss in Household viewers, slow, steady deteoriation in the 18-49 group and a major loss of 18-34's beginning after June.

Does anybody know about this?

Is this true?

[SteveFrame]

For the season to date totals which the advertisers look at a great deal, Days is exactly where it was last year which is a good thing.

Using the same exact season to date totals from the year before Days was at 2.1 in Total HH's and 1.4 in 18-49 which means they are not down overall. They are holding on. Considering how bad they got at some points this last year to be equal with last years season to date totals is a good thing too.

They are the only show to do that. The rest are down from this point in the season totals from last last years.

Here is last seaon to date for this same week:

For the SEASON September 24, 2007 through January 6, 2008

HH

1. Y&R 4.1

2. B&B 2.9

3. GH 2.4

4. ATWT 2.3

5. OLTL 2.2

6. AMC 2.1

6. DAYS 2.1

8. GL 1.9

Women 18-49 Rating

1. Y&R 1.9

2. GH 1.6

3. OLTL 1.4

3. B&B 1.4

3. DAYS 1.4

6. ATWT 1.3

7. AMC 1.2

8. GL 1.1

[SteveFrame]

As Mark H and I have both been pointing out though in a declining market any growth is something to shout about. Even being stagnant which when you look at the season to date totals Days is right now is a good thing. And the networks and advertisers are going to look at that as a positive. As Mark H said and I tried to point out in a different way it means that you have temporarily stopped the bleeding by either meeting the loss of viewers with an influx of new viewers to even things out.

Will it be enough to save any of the shows or the genre?

Who knows at this point. But all I know is that back in the summer and up to about September the ratings threads were depressing. And I personally wouldn't have given soaps very long based on that but the increases and the stagnant ratings of some is encouraging to me.

And the mere fact that I can now watch All My Children and One Life To Live again and see shows that are more balanced than they ever were before. And to not have to watch everything be about John McBain or Kendall or Greenlee or Ryan and actually see other stories - I feel better about daytime soaps than I have in a long long time.

[Jess]

It looks like more people than I realized got Jan 2 off. LOL.

I'm really loving Y & R right now and I hope it continues to go up. This could be just another yo-yo week. I hope not.

Like soapsuds, I laugh at the Days and OLTL ratings and enjoy them for the same reason. :lol:

I admit that I am surprised about Days and have to wonder if it is because students are home for the holidays. You know, I've always like rouge characters and think Brady Black has a lot of potential this time around. I am hopeful about the AMC ratings. It hasn't been great, but it also hasn't been awful. Man, I do hate those camera angles though.

It was an interesting ratings week.

[brimike]

All good points, Steve, and I know in my head, you and Mark are right. But my heart's a lot more jaded, sadly. LOL!

Also, it'll be interesting to see what the unemployment rate does for soap viewing.

[MarkH]

Brimike, what am I missing here? Are you just looking at the 18-39 or 18-49 numbers? Because in total HH, DOOL is our sole GROWTH soap over the past 12 months.

Moreover, one year is long enough to call it a trend. The Days growth is almost equivalent to the average decline of all the other soaps! Mathematically, that means that for every viewer the average soap lost, Days gained one!!!!!

Given the time frame, what makes this even more remarkable, is that this can mostly be put at the feet of Higley and any of her supporting scabs!

In this market, Days, AMC and OLTL are case studies. And what they tell us, I fear, may not be music to the ears of the some of the long-term fans of old-school soaps on this board. Newbies, ditching vets, sensationalistic stories...one could argue that they are WORKING for Days, AMC and OLTL. (OLTL is a strange hybrid, so it is kind of interesting that it is the only soap that, in the past 12 months, neither lost nor gained...it is stuck in the middle).

If I were a non-thinking network exec, I'd say; "Do what AMC and Days are doing!". Y&R would therefore rehire LML :-).

I make NO assumptions that the genre is rebounding, or that the long-term trends will shift from their current decline trajectories. But I think 12-month trajectories are themselves worthy of study...."short-term reprieves", as it were. Days, AMC, and OLTL are "bucking the trend" for the time being.

[MarkH]

Well, that's the question about total viewers. Does ONLY 18-49 matter? Or does 18-49 matter MOST?

That is an important distinction. Because, right now, the smart path (for an advertiser) would be to value any eyeball, but maybe not value them all equally.

If ratings growth in this market becomes irrelevant, simply because it is the "wrong" kind of growth for Madison Avenue...well...then I do agree all is lost .

[JONNYSBRO]

OLTL's numbers are not bad, they are steady and I cannot wait for February sweeps. Ron always like to pull out all the stops for sweeps. November was very successful, Frons was most happy with OLTL during last sweeps. Also OLTL is MUCH CHEAPER TO PRODUCE THEN GH OR AMC.GH is really needing Vanessa more then ever.If I were Frons I would put Lisa DeCazotte at AMC and move Julie Carruthers back to GH. JFP has gotta go IMO, they need some type of boost over there. Y&R is going back up but we have to give Paul Rauch the big credit. OMG the show is like night and day. Everyone keeps gushing Maria Arena Bell but Paul is a huge reason why the show is so good right now. Pre-Paul it did not look anywhere near as good as it does now. The show looks very expensive and very classic and old school. It is very good.

[brimike]

I was always taught... and mind you, I'm not saying this hasn't changed, because it's been awhile... but I was always taught that at the end of the day, total viewers is an irrelevant number. -They always are targeting a specific audience, and therefore can charge more for a certain kind of advertising. Because of the 18-49 and 18-34 demos, they make more money from a 30-second ad spot for. say, tampons than they do for men's razors.

Now, should it suddenly shift, and the number of men watching increased, then they could gauge that in a different way. But I'd be hard pressed to find a show that changed from a primarily female audience to primarily male audience like that.

But total eyeballs doesn't mean anything, especially in this economy. You'd think it would be the reverse, but as I understand it, the few thousand men watching soaps aren't enough to warrant the ad spot. I think you'd want to get as many viewers as possible, but Madison Avenue is a firm believer in the demographic. They don't want to appeal to everybody, because it's nearly impossible. They'd rather focus on who their largest demographic is. The last three soaps that got canceled were canceled because they didn't match the 18-49 demographic the network wanted them to. NOT the total viewers. Total viewers meant nothing, it was all about that 18-49 female demographic. When they didn't make the "magic number" in 18-49, they were gone.

Of course, maybe they'll look at things differently now. Who knows... I know no more than you do, believe me. I would love it if they changed the rule back to what it was thirty years ago and paid attention to those total viewers, but ABC changed everything when they started advertising themselves as the #1 network (in demos, in the fine print below), and I don't know if they're ever coming back from it.

[rangethatrover]

Johnnysbro- I am a huge OLTL fan and find their ratings embarrassing.

Totally undeserved. And I know there are some serious OLTL haters here who just love it! (I don't quite get the gloating- they seem to really hate Carlivati- but I can deal lol)

Like I said earlier (and I basically go by what you report here) Valentini must be a budgeting master with OLTL's ratings being what they are- AMC is oddly getting all of this cancellation buzz and OLTL is never even mentioned- He must be a budgeting guru. And the show generally looks pretty good, no less.

And let's not forget that OLTL's DVR numbers are almost as low as GL's- Another nail in the coffin.

And yeah November sweeps was excellent, and surprisingly the show hooked those viewers for 3 weeks.

Its such a bizarre industry where a soap like Days is this close to being cancelled (and is a strong # 3 in the ratings and at the top of the demos) and a show like OLTL which is now middle to last in demos, and tanks in the DVR- seems to be floating by unscathed...

The whole thing is weird.

[JONNYSBRO]

The thing about it is you have to look at budgets as well. AMC and DAYS were expensive. DAYS is operating on a much lower budget and Gary Tomlin is saving the show money. He actually works really fast as an executive producer. I really miss Ed Scott but his type of production values were costly for the show. Cheaper production and someone who can work with Dena as Corday adores her. AMC has alot of restructering to do and GH is VERY EXPENSIVE TO PRODUCE. They have alot of higher paying vets. I think OLTL's ratings could be better but with a show that went underbudget in 2008 and a great November sweeps, It hink the best is yet to come. It has not YO-YOED AT ALL. ATWT seems to YO-YO alot. GL had good news though with it's numbers going up, I hope they can get up to a 1.8 to 1.9 for Grant's return. If they do this and get those numbes up there and sustain, they might get a one year renewel. The show while down alot of viewers rise from last year, the show is producing alot more money. Wheeler is working the kinks out alot, the show is much better looking then a year ago even though there seems to be more work that needs to be done. The actor closes ups are not there, the sound has improved, and the camera is not as shaky. On OLTL front there were NO CUTS AT ALL, nobody took any paycuts.

[SteveFrame]

I think one of the things that maybe some may have to do is what I have tired to do.

Range said that OLTL's ratings are underserved, and yes that might be the case when the show has been good. But at the same time we have to remember that even though they aren't deserved and not what they could be or should be - at least they are not tanking.

As said many times before ratings have nothing to do with quality. A great deal of it has to do with viewer loyalty, viewer enjoyment. Just look at Days for example, the quality of the show was definitely better under the writing staff that accompanied Sheffer and with Ed Scott - but as said before the cost of that type of production was high, Scott didn't get along with Dena or Corday and caused lots of unheval backstage, and much of the stuff they tried to do changed Days too much. Many of Sheffer's stories didn't fit the Days formula. They would have fit 20 to 30 years ago but the new Days that was developed in the 90's - the change was too drastic. With the quality the ratings were bad and just kept getting worse.

Days is not at it highest quality level right now, but I hear more and more people say that it feels like Days now.

Anyway the point was that ratings and quality don't go hand in hand.

If OLTL can continue to keep the balance, and Ron can get on a even plane with stories. His tenure has been plagued with some uneveness that has hurt him - some of it like the strike was not his fault and some I feel has been.

Days has steadily built because Tomlin esp. has helped things a great deal. You can tell a big difference in even the tone of the scenes and stuff since he took over.

If OLTL can get on a more even tone and not up and down then eventually the ratings will stabilize or go up some slowly. OLTL destroyed viewer confidence over the last few years and slowly drove it's core audience away. The fact that the ratings are stabilizing for them indicates that they are finally starting to hold onto a new core audience and now they just have to build on that.

ABC shows esp. have relied on that ratings stunt spikes for survival over the last few years. Alot of people keep referring to those. I just don't see them as a sign of good ratings at all. For me the true picture comes from viewing the stagnant or stable ratings and that is where the true picture is coming from. What I see is AMC and OLTL not crashign and burning after the spikes as they once did. That tells me that they are once again building a core audience who is sticking around for the day to day stuff.

IF they can do that the daily ratings will look better but also it will make for bigger spikes during sweeps when they do pull the stunts.