Jump to content

May 11-15, 2009


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

On these weeks that the demos are doing better, and without seeing the 50 and older demos, I always worry when the shows don't move that much in overall HH's.

I know that the 18-49 and younger are more important to advertisers, but polls in the last few years keep showing that the TV audience is skewing older to the older demographic. And since live TV is still the most important demo to advertisers, I just worry that the loss of older viewers is going to end up hurting worse in the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 27
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Advertisers don't care about the older viewers. Research shows that 50+ people, compared with younger viewers, don't spend as much money and are less likely to try a new brand. The overall audience may dwindle, but as long as the under-50 demo is strong, that's all that counts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

But the trends say that the younger audience is not going increase as more and more of the younger demos shift viewing habits to the new technology. And in the mean time it is going to take several more years before advertisers and the Nielsen's catch up to that.

That is one of the big reasons that the viewing audience for live television is skewing higher because they are the ones who are less likely to view on an Ipod or the Computer.

Networks are going to be more willing to stick with a show if the overall HH's are still good. If not we will be seeing more shows moved to things like Passions was where even on the Internet you have to pay a subscription price to see them. And frankly right now in this tight economy even if it was my favorite show I would just be left out in the cold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The fluctuations in the 18-49 women demo that have been occurring recently suggests that the bigger problem is that the younger audience is not loyal. Watching soaps is not a daily habit and external events influence their viewing habits. Y&R is the one soap that does well on the Internet and SoapNet. The other soaps appear to be struggling to varying degrees. ABC does not even mention GH's ratings when it releases SoapNet's PR statements. As along as the soaps cannot build on the 18-49 women demo and it continues to slip, the soaps are going to have to keep cutting their budgets substantially and eventually cancellation will become a reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

And the more you cut out any demo range centering on grandparents and parents you cut out generational transfer viewing too. So many of my online friends learned to watch soaps from their parents or grandparents. When the older generation quits watching, they quit passing it down.

Soaps are so stupid in that continue to allow the network gurus and the advertisers push them for the 18 to 49 target demo during the day. It is a proven fact that many of that generation are not home anymore. Older viewers are the ones home during the day now. They make up the majority of the daytime audience. Daytime soaps don't appeal to them anymore. So they turn off and watch reruns of primetime shows or the news during the day.

More than any other branch of TV, daytime soaps need to reach out to that. Also more and more recent surveys are showing that working mothers are having an even harder time with day care in this economy. The news the other night said that more and more working parents are turning to their grandparents to watch the kids when they are at work because most times it is free child care.

If soaps could get the grandparents to tune back in, then 9 times out of time those young kids when they are out of school will be watching what Grandma watches and a whole new generation of soap viewer is born.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

To be fair, I don't think a ton of people really knew about the shocking ending on Friday. I would not even say it was all over cyberspace. Plus, for those who did not know, the scene was at the very end of the episode so if you weren't watching anyway, you didn't know you missed anything.

The test will be how the following Monday does. Will news spread? Will people who missed it want to tune in to see if there is more to the story? Will people who are not sure who Thom is but sense something is about to go down with Cane turn their TV's on.

Since it was all about their wedding, that is where the most of the blame lies. Frankly, it was a boring wedding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes. Also, if there is high tune in the following Monday...(and Bierdz has not been shown since that last Friday)...I wonder if that could actually promote more tune-OUT (on Tuesday and subsequent days) by people who were feeling a little 'bait and switch'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The soaps have no choice. The companies selling the products and the advertisers know the demos of the consumers of their product. They want that 18 to 49 women demo because these women have the money and they buy household and other beauty products. Most older Americans have brand loyalty, are poorer and live off fixed incomes. If the soaps cannot attract the 18 to 49 women demo because it no longer exists during the daytime, the companies will pull out their ad dollars and take them elsewhere. So the networks will then have to find advertisers with products that target older viewers to buy ads during the soaps. This means much lower ad dollars and the soap budgets will have to be slashed. No wonder the soaps are in so much trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Actually, the only thing correct about that statement is that older Americans have brand loyalty. While we've all heard about the older people living on "fixed incomes," study after study has shown that this demographic has more disposable income than any other age group. The ONLY reason advertisers continue to cater to the 18-49 demographic is because they believe older people will not try new products, and will not change their brands, in general (brand loyalty, as you say).

Personally, I think advertisers need to come around. That thinking may have been true a generation ago, but not anymore. But until they do come around, we're stuck with the current obsession with the dwindling younger audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

See, the future is quite optimistic here.

Soon, we'll be able to count every eyeball ... or at least, we'll be able to count the eyeballs more accurately (interactive DVRs, online streaming, on-demand and PPV TV).

More importantly, through direct and indirect methods. we'll know the viewer's PERSONAL brand loyalty, preferrred brands, categories of interest, etc. So we won't have to rely on fallible predictors like age and gender...we'll deliver targeted messages that are most appropriate for the person.

The internet is already getting very good at this...and it is all converging in that direction.

Once this happens, it will me much easier to monetize content again. Moreoever, there won't be a whole class of unvalued audience members.

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

    • 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.
    • 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

    • Okay I can buy that when Brook Lynn was a teen.  Now she knows the child is a boy one would think she'd be slightly suspicious.  Then again, Gio looks nothing like either of them so maybe not lol.
    • I've been behind & just got caught up & the last 3 days were amazing!
    • Yeah.  The hot, poor bad boy with a chip on his shoulder but with a heart of gold was a common soap trope in the 80s 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • That's been an issue with me... the lack of a cohesive 'Have Not' crowd that has focus other than Leslie/Eva.   I would beef up Jan, Mona, Laura, Joey, and few other male characters.. and not just be out to overthrow the Duprees.. but co-existing and broadening the scope of the show since the show is called Beyond the Gates. I think the set up the show has with everything revolving around the Duprees will become predictable especially if they always win.   It would be like Victor Newman on Y & R for 40+ years.. always winning, hardly ever losing.   With MVJ/Guza.. both trained under that mindset... I fear that will happen.   I've always heard from a performer that is playing a character like Leslie/Dana that you have to find the victim/hurt beneath the surface in order to play a villain/villainess... and I think that's why I enjoy watching her.. because she brings so much more to the part than what the writers put on the page.
    • I figure that was really hard for Dom to do. I completely GET why they wrote it the way they did but I wonder if it was necessary. Meanwhile I have 2 really icky ideas in my head. Drew is going to blame Tracy KNOWING it was not her. Dante is going to blame Lulu.  After that, everyone else is going to be mad at Lois.  Tracy is going to double down on wanting to get rid of Sonny. Sonny's going to be more dug in to stay because he now has a new descendant. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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