Jump to content

June 22-26, 2009


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

If there was something better out there believe me the networks would be using it. First and foremost the Neilsen is a business and it would be in their best interest to stay in touch with technology and use it to benefit them the most. Secondly if they was so antiquated and flawed, not to say that they are perfect another company would have no problem beating them at the game as of today they are the only ones because it is not as easy as it looks and yes there are other companies trying to do what they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 227
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

They are indeed the top shows on Soapnet. Soapnet is interested in original programming, but not to replace these two shows in primetime. They are successful, and make money....and continue to rise in the ratings. They don't need to replace them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yep on "they shouldn't." The few I watch deserve the "they didn't."

I can't figure out the multiquote function, but in response to cyberologist, I think a lot of people felt REG was treated shabbily and left with her. I felt Forbes March was treated shabbily and left with him. Dan G. was really treated shabbily too.

Regarding, SoapNet, it doesn't seem like 469,000 viewers watching a show is very much. I wonder how many viewers it takes to support a Cable channel. If OLTL and AMC are the network's big performers and they aren't registering even a half a million viewers, it must not take much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

First of all, I seriously doubt OLTL and AMC are "free" to Soapnet. Even though they are both part of ABC Daytime under Frons' administration, they are separate profit centers so I am sure there is some transfer of funds and there is some "expense" involved.

I think the shows are so bad, it takes very little to finally convince a viewer to tune out. Most of us are hanging in there out of loyalty and a faint hope that things will improve, not because we're being entertained. So the departure or reduced air time for a beloved character/couple makes it really easy to just stop hanging on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This is a great post.

The Neilsen system is still founded on good principles (random and representative sampling, using a sample size large enough to produce small confidence intervals/margins of error). With regard to the Neilsens, there are many flaws (most related to the technology of assessment, and sometimes related to representativeness), but the core principle remains an excellent one.

The problem, as you note, relates to both the data collection method and the interpretations (e.g., your "appointment television" point--which still makes some sense because recorders are more likely to FF--but even live viewers are likely to go to the bathroom etc. during commercials; the higher value of selected demographics).

There are rapidly emerging viewer count systems -- some owned by Neilsen -- aimed at counting viewers in the new media as you suggest.

Tivo, in the US, is using its ability to measure what subscribers are viewing as a 'ratings' service in selected markets. The problem with Tivo is that it is still only a selective subset of the audience. Also, even Tivo has the "people meter" problem -- knowing exactly who is in the room and watching.

Several services now claim to provide counts of streaming views. The problem is that the services offer widely varying estimates.

So, the technology and sampling are still in flux, but the industry is moving in your direction.

I can fully see the advertiser-supported services wanting to go to 100% streaming, since then viewers CANNOT FF (and it is hard to capture or copy). I personally cannot wait until the "broadcast"/"cablecast" networks as we know them are gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

^^ I'd settle for ABC and other broadcasters who put their episodes on the line to remove the international barriers. Just think the audience they could have if they were accessible world wide any time of the day or night. I don't know the legalities of it all, but I'm sure if there was a purchase aspect ($1 a show/month - significant but nominal and accountable) that could get around the border. It's annoying that as a 30 year fan living outside the US there is no way of knowing what I represent and US soaps are not just watched in the US market, nor are advertiser's products just sold to Americans.

*PO'd because she doesn't have a DVR and has to pick up her kids from daycamp at 3 PM for the rest of the month...*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Unless SoapNet becomes a part of basic cable like USA, Lifetime, TNT, etc... I don't see how its number mean much. Its ratings are a specific subset of a specific subset. Of course I could see how advertisers might want to appeal to people who are still willing and able to pay for that tier of cable.

But maybe I'm generalizing. SoapNet isn't part of basic cable for providers available to me. Are there others getting it? Or is it cheap enough to add that it doesn't matter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Two facts about Soapnet:

No. 1 basic cable network in frequency of viewing among women 18-49.

No. 1 basic cable network in average minutes viewed among women 18-49.

This includes USA, TNT, TBS, and all the other basic cable networks. They all fall behind SoapNet in these two areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

SoapNet is not on basic cable network across all the country so its ratings cannot be compared to networks like USA, etc. Also, those stats that you quoted seem parsed. What are the actual SoapNet ratings in that women 18-49 demo compared to the basic cable networks?

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

    • FROM THE VAULT: WEEKLY DAYTIME NIELSEN RATINGS: WEEKS OF 10/29/73-11/2/73 & 11/5/73-11/9/73:  

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I agree that she isn't Dixie or Rosanna and shouldn't be acting like either. I just found it strange that she had a naive Southern character and a wealthy urbane character in the past and didn't experiment with accents before (unless I missed it, correct me if I'm wrong). She used to do improv characters on YouTube. She's probably doing something similar here.

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • And here I thought I'd never think about Lauren Tewes again after her brief appearance in Twin Peaks Season 3.
    • I may be the single person who does not mind Transatlantic Campy Pamela. I think it perfectly suits this sort of Absolutely Fabulous-esque supporting character she's playing much more than it did when Cady tried weird and often broad stuff at AMC* or Y&R, or later stints at ATWT. She's not Dixie and she's not trying to be. I will freely admit some of the other chances she took at other shows often came off stiff, hammy or downright mortifying (Kelly Andrews, come on down). (* - and I say that as one of the few who was somewhat into Cady trying to make Dixie more cosmopolitan in the Rosanna Cabot mold in mid-2000s AMC, just to liven the character up again)
    • There’s absolutely nothing exciting happening storyline wise but I’m always happy to see the vets on my screen so I’ll take what I can get. It’s also just nice to see them all dressed up in the same room, it always gives classic Y&R vibes. The best part? No Phyllis. 
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Well now we had Ashley's reaction-and weren't we all gasping when she appeared to hate it-but she was just joking!! She loved it. Now we have to see Abby's reaction, and maybe Mamie could come back to say she loves it. How about Jill via Zoom giving her opinion (she'll love it) and bring in a day player to play Mrs Martinez to say she loves it also... I feel bad to keep dumping on this show (not really) but when the choices they make are so inane, it's the only entertainment value the show has. Let's unpack the Nikki birthday story. So Claire wants to throw her Nana a birthday bash as away of endearing Kyle to Victor. Don't quite get the logic there,but OK. She hires a party planner who makes ridiculous suggestions. Slightly annoyed that Y&R are hiring someone for this role for 5 episodes when we never see doctors, co- workers etc. But OK to that to. With all the talk we are expecting something special. What we get is the Jazz Lounge hideously decorated with some ugly tablecloths and a few tacky decorations. They needed a planner for this? Then the guest list consists of family members (no grandchildren)and a few others. Hardly a party. As usual the costuming is pretty awful. A red and black theme ? And our guest of honor is sporting a do that looks like a cross between Cameron Diaz in Something about Mary and Marie from Roxette. They should have had an intimate dinner and ditched all the fanfare. Would have been way more believable.
    • Please register in order to view this content

    • Her accent sounds horrible and doesn't fit in line with the character or the dialogue. I was just messing around on YouTube and perusing early Tad and Dixie videos. Notably, Dixie, a resident of Pigeon Hollow, West Virginia, has no discernible accent. i have no idea why she would add a defunct accent to this character now. I want to do an honest survey here. I watch BTG every day and I love it. It's not perfect, but I find it 99% entertaining. For those that find fault with it - what is actually bothering you? I'm not going to argue at all, or disagree with you. I just want to know what others are seeing that I'm not.
    • It's a choice and today, she made it more British than ever before. It's almost like she's making Pamela act like how she thinks she should be acting.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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