Jump to content

December 12-16, 2005


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Highest Amount of Viewer For Each Soap (Wk. of 12/12) In BOLD, in the (-) is the comparison versus their highest number on the 12/5 week (NOT for the same day on 12/5 week, versus their highest number on 12/5 week). So, Thursday was obviously 12/12 weeks "golden" day!

1:(3) Y&R: Thursday, 12/15: 4.4/5,453,000.....(-649,000)

2:(5) Y&R: Wednesday, 12/14: 4.2/5,353,000

3:(1) Y&R: Friday, 12/16: 4.2/5,346,000

4:(4) Y&R: Monday, 12/12: 4.3/5,330,000

5:(2) Y&R: Tuesday, 12/13: 4.1/5,046,000

6:(9) B&B: Thursday, 12/15: 3.5/4,578,000.....(-381,000)

7:(6) B&B: Friday, 12/16: 3.3/4,316,000

8:(8) B&B: Monday, 12/12: 3.4/4,300,000

9:(7) B&B: Tuesday, 12/13: 3.5/4,283,000

10:(11) B&B: Wednesday, 12/14: 3.4/4,170,000

11:(16) ATWT: Thursday, 12/15: 3.0/3,892,000.....(-296,000)

12:(10) ATWT: Friday, 12/16: 2.8/3,703,000

13:(19) GH: Thursday, 12/15: 3.0/3,644,000.....(-259,000)

14:(15) ATWT: Tuesday, 12/13: 2.9/3,631,000

15:(29) ATWT: Wednesday, 12/14: 2.9/3,590,000

16:(21) ATWT: Monday, 12/12: 2.7/3,589,000

17:(13) GH: Monday, 12/12: 3.0/3,572,000

18:(30) AMC: Thursday, 12/15: 2.7/3,437,000.....(+010,000)

19:(12) GH: Friday, 12/16: 2.7/3,416,000

20:(33) DAYS: Wednesday, 12/14: 2.7/3,305,000.....(-394,000)

21:(14) DAYS: Friday, 12/16: 2.7/3,291,000

22:(32) DAYS: Tuesday, 12/13: 2.6/3,279,000

23:(35) GL: Monday, 12/12: 2.4/3,257,000.....(-010,000)

24:(25) AMC: Wednesday, 12/14: 2.6/3,185,000

25:(27) DAYS: Thursday, 12/15: 2.6/3,184,000

26:(24) GH: Tuesday, 12/13: 2.6/3,167,000

27:(17) GH: Wednesday, 12/14: 2.5/3,127,000

28:(22) AMC: Monday, 12/12: 2.6/3,123,000

29:(28) OLTL: Thursday, 12/15: 2.6/3,117,000.....(-410,000)

30:(23) AMC: Friday, 12/16: 2.7/3,110,000

31:(36) DAYS: Monday, 12/12: 2.5/3,107,000

32:(18) OLTL: Monday, 12/12: 2.6/3,091,000

33:(39) OLTL: Wednesday, 12/14: 2.4/3,069,000

34:(20) OLTL: Friday, 12/16: 2.5/3,057,000

35:(26) AMC: Tuesday, 12/13: 2.5/2,944,000

36:(40) GL: Wednesday, 12/14: 2.3/2,936,000

37:(37) OLTL: Tuesday, 12/13: 2.5/2,928,000

38:(31) GL: Friday, 12/16: 2.2/2,906,000

39:(38) GL: Thursday, 12/15: 2.3/2,852,000

40:(34) GL: Tuesday, 12/13: 2.3/2,841,000

41:(41) PSNS: Thursday, 12/15: 1.8/2,249,000.....(-001,000)

42:(42) PSNS: Friday, 12/16: 1.7/2,234,000

43:(45) PSNS: Wednesday, 12/14: 1.8/2,175,000

44:(43) PSNS: Tuesday, 12/13: 1.8/2,165,000

45:(44) PSNS: Monday, 12/12: 1.5/1,987,000

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

All I can say is at least GL has held steady at a 2.3 while all the other soaps have gone up and down.....this tells you something....GL has a loyal audience and does not fluctuate like other soaps and the ratings reflect the consistency of an interest in a program. It is not good when a show fluctuates from week to week! So you all have to give GL some credit for maintaining a consistent 2.3.

On another note........what a surprise.....a few months back everyone thought the ratings would drop like bomb when the old Cassie, Danny, Michelle, Edmund, Ross, Bill, etc....were gone-------I'm still waiting for everyone's prediction to happen!!!!!

I'm enjoying GL more now than I have this past year! I think it has the flashiest opening on daytime and the storylines as of late have been entertaining and exciting. Keep in mind GL has been at a 2.3 for the past month and that is something to build on. Don't be surprised if it's ranked the number 4 or 5 soap in a few months and then you will have something to talk about and eat your own words CANCELLATION!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

And dude, you ain't alone on that one either ;) .

Congrats to ATWT. I don't watch it but the fact that it is actually above GH for once makes me smile :) . Maybe they'll start to change their strategy a bit. And as for Days, well what can I say? They tried but I guess ppl aren't rushing to tune in like they used to. I wouldn't have minded even a .1 jump but at least they're holding on to that 2.6. :) Two (or was it 3? :unsure:) years ago, they couldn't hold down any ratings for a long period. So I guess no decline is better than steady decline to say the least :).

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

    • I think Hotel would have the similar demos as Dynasty W 19-49 would have been strong. St Elsewhere survived b/c it attracted wealthier/urban viewers and The Equalizer was probably stronger with men and younger viewers. So each had their own niche-good counter-programming. As for Aaron Spelling's influence over ABC in terms of scheduling, I don't know if he would have been happy with Charlie's Angels moving to Sunday, The Colbys scheduled on Thursdays or Matt Houston moved to Fridays. I think he just had to roll with the punches.
    • Thank you @Broderick. That information was so helpful. I watched the first episode of the "Mansion of the Damned" storyline. I was extremely confused by Margaret Colin's Paige and her relationship to other characters. Your post helps me understand what's happening. The rest of the show was easy to understand and I'm enjoying it. Hunter's Nola is a good character for me since I know Kim Hunter from other work.  I must have seen clips of Edge of Night before because I remember seeing April. 
    • How is it back tracking when it was in fact the word I originally used? It's not.
    • You know what is a great way to stop these unclear "rumors"?  Just stop posting them and then back tracking with words like "apparently".   Anyhow, I didn't find the Tracy/Lois scenes as good as I hoped.    
    • Jason, in thinking this over, I realize that we look at this space, differently. To me it is a potentially collaborative space. Now that I've realized this, what I should have said, "I'm having a problem because what I'm seeing is not matching up with your descriptions. Maybe these files I just got are misdated. Maybe it's something else. I will keep you posted. Meanwhile this episode, its edit, is ready, even though I might have to issue a corrected date later. But, people can enjoy the performances now. 
    • Thank you for the constructive suggestion. 
    • But how is it "apparent" that she signed a new 3-year contract? Your wording had a voice of authority -- as if you knew it was true. A better way to post about it? Say you read online that she signed a new contract, but have no idea if that's true.
    • This interview actually reminds me a bit of Kim Zimmer’s press during the infamous clone storyline on Guiding Light, or Deidre Hall during the possession story on Days. All three were seasoned daytime veterans who made it clear they valued airtime for their characters, not just being part of a romantic pairing. It seems that idea was part of the pitch behind these bigger-than-life plots. They all took big swings in their performances. When I read Kim Zimmer’s memoir, I thought she captured it best — she wanted to be respected for being willing to take those risks. To paraphrase her, she knew it was ridiculous for Reva to think she was pregnant after menopause, but she still threw herself into those scenes and made them real. That’s what really struck me about Victoria Wyndham’s interview too. She responded like a real person. It felt like she was telling Michael Logan that she knew Justine — and a geriatric pregnancy with twins — was totally preposterous, but that she still deserved credit for trying to keep the show alive and entertain the audience. And honestly, I think that's more than fair. Logan is looking for a reductive answer for who is to blame.  And, she's telling him to accept that they were all well-meaning.  Which is not a defense of bad storytelling.  But, I understand that she's frustrated because she interpreted Logan's critique as a lack of commitment, and she wants him to know that she was committed! (maybe not for the best, but committed).
    • Fine, you only had to say so. It's not a problem to me NOT to post this. I have no idea what this means. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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