Jump to content
Email System Update

ALL: January 1994 Ratings

Gray Bunny

Recommended Posts

  • Members
Gray Bunny Mentor

Gray Bunny

Posted
  • Author
  • Members
Posted

Keep in mind, this was back when SOD published every 2 weeks instead of every week, so we see ratings progression of every other week unfortunately.

Two weeks before L&L's return...

Ratings10111993.jpg

L&L's return...

Ratings10251993.jpg

Two weeks later...

Ratings11081993.jpg

Okay, this next one is from March 16th, 1992. First of all, it looks like a real lull for soaps at this point, ratings-wise. Secondly, this must've been right when Soap Opera Digest started listing the actual ratings numbers, complete with with bars... the bars are so poorly spaced! B&B's 5.0 is actually *longer* than GL's 5.1 right above it! lol

Ratings03161992.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members
Carolyn1980 Newbie

Carolyn1980

Posted
  • Members
Posted

The ratings are much better then, but not exactly comparable to today. For instance, LOVING's 3.3 rating in 1993 is equivalent to a 2.6 household rating today. And AMC's rating of 9.3 for that week in 1981 when GH was airing the Luke/Laura wedding is actually only equivalent to a 5.9 household rating today. Why?

Because each ratings point is actually a percent of the total households in the US. For instance, Y&R's 3.4 rating last week means 3.4% of US TV households watched the program, on average, each day last week. Since the number of US TV households increases each year, one ratings point (or percent) is worth more each year. In 1981, a 1.0 was equivalent to 729,000 households. You can see in the SOD ratings snaps that in 1993, it was worth 959,000. Today, each point is worth 1,149,000 households. And it'll be updated again at the start of the new fall season, as it is every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
Sylph Newbie

Sylph

Posted
  • Members
Posted

First you took a rating point, multiplied it by the equivalent of households and then converted that number of households back to ratings point according to today's equivalent in households, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
Carolyn1980 Newbie

Carolyn1980

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Yeah....although, btw, if you're referring to my LOVING 3.3/2.6 equivalent, it's not my math that was wrong, it was the figure I used (959,000), lol.....since a ratings point was worth even less than that in 1993, that 3.3 is worth even less than a 2.6 today

To compare any ratings from the past to today, multiply the rating (say 3.3) times the number of households each ratings point was worth back then (say 942,000), and then divide by what a ratings point is worth today (1,149,0000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
Sylph Newbie

Sylph

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Why didn't you do it the other way around, i.e. multiplied the past rating point by today's equivalent? A percentage is a percentage, one of it's main functions is comparison. When you say France has a 57% budget deficit, you don't go converting that to euros, then dollars, then calculating how much of a percantage of the whole US budget deficit that is.

That's wrong.

You go the other way around. France's 57% is the same as US 57% because those are %.

Nielsen f*cks things up by giving the equivalent, I don't know why they do it. :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
Carolyn1980 Newbie

Carolyn1980

Posted
  • Members
Posted

I did it that way because it's a more accurate comparison of actual hard numbers. I "get" that it's a big deal to get say a 20.0 rating back then, since it represented 20% of households, a big chunk....but I'd argue that a 20.0 rating is a bigger deal now not just because it's worth more households, but also because there's much more competition today.

The fact is, a 1.0 rating in 1981 was worth 729,000 households, and today a 1.0 is worth 1,149,000 households. Yes, they're both 1%...but today it's 1% of a much bigger pie, with many more choices.

Look at it this way...doing it your way, let's say there are only 1000 TV households in 1948, and 900 of them watch Meet the Press on Sunday morning, one of only two choices they have. That's a 90.0 rating. Would you say that's the best rating ever? I wouldn't, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Recent Posts

    • Antoyne
      DAYS: June 2025 Discussion Thread

      By Antoyne · Posted

      John Black actually was the ultimate good guy soap hero. So I don’t mind the town gushing over him. It’s deserved.
    • Liberty City
      BTG: June 2025 Discussion Thread

      By Liberty City · Posted

      Be glad it wasn't a Perry production. 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • dragonflies
      BTG: June 2025 Discussion Thread

      By dragonflies · Posted

      I love my girl, but nope he's pathetic. 250K and now he's put her business at risk.   L O S E R    

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Soaplovers
      DAYS: June 2025 Discussion Thread

      By Soaplovers · Posted

      The whole town gushing over John Black as if he was a saint is eye rolling.  I guess death really colors people's memories over his many flaws, but I guess that is normal and human nature. I'm still confused as to why Leo hasn't been written out.  The actor stank up two soaps with his sub par acting, what does he have on TPTB's to remain on these soaps.   What's the point of Cat?  I hope the new head-writers figure out her purpose and develop her character. And I much prefer scenes not focusing on John's death because life does go on for the world when someone passes.  
    • P.J.
      Guiding Light Discussion Thread

      By P.J. · Posted

      Wasn't there a break in Zaslow's first run? I thought Roger was off-screen for a while, and when Zas came back, Roger was hiding at the boarding house and Nola figured out there was something hinkey about him. I'm pretty sure Simon chose to leave the first time and was replaced by RVV. I don't want to assume Jordan's issues played a role in his first departure, but Maeve said in an interview that at some point, it became very hard for her to work with him and she asked to work with him less. That seems to fit 1986, where suddenly Vanessa is essentially Ross' law clerk and not at every Lewis family moment.
    • Soaplovers
      BTG: June 2025 Discussion Thread

      By Soaplovers · Posted

      He needs to divorce her arse with her constant cheating.   She's no better than Doug... she's F*cking pathetic.
    • kalbir
      Guiding Light Discussion Thread

      By kalbir · Posted

      I didn't know of any interruptions for Maeve Kinkead after her 1997 return. Her runs would then be 1981-1987, 1989-1996, 1997-2000, short arcs until the end. I knew Maureen Garrett second run was interrupted from a 2009 interview but I couldn't recall the exact year. Her runs would then be 1976-1980, 1988-2000, short arcs until the end.
    • DemetriKane
      BTG: June 2025 Discussion Thread

      By DemetriKane · Posted

      As I said in May, I have no problem with Martin and Bradley being married. You can still do all the fun introloper storylines with them as you do everyone else. Both men of a certain age, and it is very believable for them to have either a first love or have been previously married. And, you can do it without either of them cheating!  

      Please register in order to view this content

       I said something similar during the premiere week. Bill was the perfect age to play Martin as Vernon and Anita's child. I would've much preferred this version, but oh well.
    • P.J.
      Guiding Light Discussion Thread

      By P.J. · Posted

      I don't know how you want to count Maeve. She "retired" in '00, but would come back for appearances. I don't know however if she made an appearance in '01 or '03. In '02 I believe she came back for Josh and Reva's wedding. I assume she came back when Gina Tognoni took over the role of Dinah. And I know she was back for Ross' memorial service. Maureen Garrett was around until at least '00. I don't think Holly was in town when Ben returned though. I just got pissed off about Jerry all over again.
    • DeeVee
      Guiding Light Discussion Thread

      By DeeVee · Posted

      So, pretty sure Zaslow, Garrett, Kinkead, and Newman all chose to leave the first time. (If that's wrong, please correct me). Bernau - not sure why he left the first time. Was it voluntary? Or did they decide to write him out? They were writing so many out during that time period. It always seemed odd to me that they introduced Alex, FINALLY giving him someone he could talk to, and then he was written out. Or maybe that's why they made Alex his sister, so she could take his place as the head of the Spaulding family? Would love more intel on that if anyone knows. Simon - was he replaced by RVV? Or did he voluntarily leave the first time? It seems to me like one of those times TPTB decided to sex up or glamorize a character (and it clearly flopped). If he was fired, interesting he came back. Again, would love if someone could spill the tea. Clarke - I've always assumed he left because of his personal issues, but not sure if that was the case the first time.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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

  I accept