If you're going to copy/paste, please link. Thank you.

Numbers are based on Live+Same Day ratings

Ratings for the week August 30 - September 3, 2010

Total Viewers

1. Y&R 4,973,000 (-67,000/+173,000)

2. B&B 3,144,000 (+38,000/-116,000)

3. GH 2,660,000 (+144,000/+203,000)

4. DAYS 2,443,000 (-32,000/-269,000)

5. AMC 2,420,000 (+94,000/+140,000)

6. OLTL 2,375,000 (+111,000/+21,000)

7. ATWT 2,368,000 (+8,000/-30,000)

Households

1. Y&R 3.5/12 (same/same)

2. B&B 2.2/8 (same/-.2)

3. GH 1.9/6 (+.1/same)

4. AMC 1.8/6 (+.1/+.1)

4. DAYS 1.8/6 (same/-.2) <- ties low rating (9th staight week)

6. ATWT 1.7/6 (same/-.1)

6. OLTL 1.7/6 (same/same)

Women 18-49 Viewers

1. Y&R 1,012,000 (-40,000/+23,000)

2. GH 881,000 (+34,000/+46,000)

3. DAYS 678,000 (-80,000/-94,000)

4. OLTL 657,000 (+16,000/-19,000)

5. B&B 637,000 (+55,000/+6,000)

6. AMC 593,000 (+3,000/-24,000)

7. ATWT 536,000 (+37,000/+59,000)

Women 18-49 Rating

1. Y&R 1.5/10 (-.1/same) <- ties low rating (Last time: August 31 - September 4, 2009)

2. GH 1.3/9 (same/same)

3. DAYS 1.0/7 (-.1/-.2)

3. OLTL 1.0/7 (same/same)

3. B&B 1.0/6 (+.1/same)

6. AMC 0.9/6 (same/same)

7. ATWT 0.8/5 (same/+.1)

Girls 12-17 Viewers

1. Y&R 49,000 (+7,000/+17,000)

2. GH 42,000 (+7,000/-3,000)

3. ATWT 37,000 (-4,000/+10,000)

4. B&B 33,000 (+2,000/+11,000)

5. OLTL 26,000 (-2,000/-7,000)

6. AMC 14,000 (-4,000/-1,000)

7. DAYS 9,000 (-2,000/-10,000)

Women 18-34 Rating

1. Y&R 0.9/6 (-.1/-.1)

1. GH 0.9/6 (+.1/+.1)

3. DAYS 0.8/5 (-.1/-.1)

4. B&B 0.6/4 (+.1/-.1)

4. OLTL 0.6/4 (same/-.2) <- ties low rating (6th straight week)

6. AMC 0.5/4 (same/-.3) <- ties low rating (2nd straight week)

6. ATWT 0.5/3 (same/-.1)

Men 18+ Viewers

1. Y&R 1,123,000 (-98,000/+25,000)

2. B&B 673,000 (-18,000/-29,000)

3. DAYS 553,000 (+52,000/+18,000)

4. GH 503,000 (+78,000/+76,000)

5. AMC 471,000 (+45,000/+24,000)

6. ATWT 460,000 (-11,000/-30,000)

7. OLTL 448,000 (+59,000/+43,000)

-------------------------------------

Day-To-Day Ratings - HH/Total Viewers

AMC

Monday: 1.8/2,405,000

Tuesday: 1.8/2,424,000

Wednesday: 1.8/2,330,000

Thursday: 1.9/2,484,000

Friday: 1.8/2,458,000

ATWT

Monday: 1.7/2,436,000

Tuesday: 1.7/2,436,000

Wednesday: 1.8/2,467,000

Thursday: 1.8/2,378,000

Friday: 1.6/2,125,000

B&B

Monday: 2.3/3,260,000

Tuesday: 2.2/3,114,000

Wednesday: 2.4/3,328,000

Thursday: 2.3/3,144,000

Friday: 2.0/2,873,000

DAYS

Monday: 2.0/2,730,000

Tuesday: 1.8/2,480,000

Wednesday: 1.7/2,406,000

Thursday: 1.7/2,276,000

Friday: 1.8/2,325,000

GH

Monday: 2.1/2,972,000

Tuesday: 1.9/2,626,000

Wednesday: 1.9/2,567,000

Thursday: 1.9/2,761,000

Friday: 1.8/2,375,000

OLTL

Monday: 1.8/2,523,000

Tuesday: 1.7/2,354,000

Wednesday: 1.7/2,221,000

Thursday: 1.7/2,367,000

Friday: 1.8/2,412,000

Y&R

Monday: 3.6/5,333,000

Tuesday: 3.4/4,972,000

Wednesday: 3.7/5,122,000

Thursday: 3.4/4,786,000

Friday: 3.2/4,654,000

----------------------

For the SEASON September 21, 2009 through September 5, 2010

Households

1. Y&R 3.7

2. B&B 2.4

3. DAYS 2.2

4. GH 2.1

5. AMC 2.0

6. OLTL 1.9

7. ATWT 1.8

Women 18-49 Rating

1. Y&R 1.9

2. GH 1.5

3. DAYS 1.4

4. B&B 1.1

4. OLTL 1.1

6. AMC 1.0

7. ATWT 0.9

NBC needs to get rid of Dena ASAP! and shake their heads and bring back Deidri Hall...DAYS NEEDS star power to go up against General Hospital and a great new writer...

Yep!

I think the ratings went up for GH because of the Scrubs story cliffhanger. Yes, I know Brenda and Sonny were promo'd. Monday, Lisa got hit by the car. The Scrubs story is the only interesting thing written on GH right now, IMO. I think viewers tend to tune in for the cliffhangers and then tune back out because of the bad writing. 2.1 on Mon. and back down to the 1.8 by Friday. GH went thru that last summer/fall with the carnival and JJ's return, then people tuned back out due to the usual bad writing. People don't care if James Franco or Vanessa are on: they want good writing to make them tune in.

What is this obsession with Deidre? She was no longer a star when she was let go. And even the big VM return to GH basically just copied what CC return did for DAYS. Modest surge in HH, but absolutely nothing in demos. And even this surge will die for sure when the returning people realize you really cannot turn the time back.

What DAYS needs to to is focus less on Sami and invest more into the hopefull newbies. Mel, Nathan, Stephanie, Chad, Will, Gabby, even Mia had a great potential but instead to really give them a chance to prove themselves they kept them on a neverending backburner so even people who got excited someone new is finally having a story got tired and eventually left. Youtube and internet is full of abandoned clip sites about Steph/Phillip, Nathan/Mel, Chad/Mia, etc. Those were created by new viewers getting interested in the show who could be turn into a new generation of passionate viewers, but the show wasn´t able to hold their attention, because they believed bringing back faded star from 20 years ago will be more rewarding. Well, they were wrong.

The only one of those younger characters on Days you mentioned that doesn't get on my nerves is Will. Chandler is a pretty good actor. The rest, blah.

And I've been told a thousand times that fanbase website activity mean zip in the world of ratings, so I'm not sure why abandoned clip sites mean there was ratings potential for those characters.

It comes down to the writing. Good writing brings in viewers. The problem with Days is that the writing ain't so great. It hasn't been for ages. Certain characters have been getting the blame for the ratings' downturn, but it really boils down to people aren't buying what Dena/Ken/Gary are selling.

The ratings could change for the better in the coming weeks, who knows? I do wonder if they don't, what will Ken Corday blame this time.

Edited September 11, 201015 yr by KSlater

The ratings could change for the better in the coming weeks, who knows? I do wonder if they don't, what will Ken Corday blame this time.

Anything but himself and Dena.

Anything but himself and Dena.

Exactly.

The only one of those younger characters on Days you mentioned that doesn't get on my nerves is Will. Chandler is a pretty good actor. The rest, blah.

And I've been told a thousand times that fanbase website activity mean zip in the world of ratings, so I'm not sure why abandoned clip sites mean there was ratings potential for those characters.

It comes down to the writing. Good writing brings in viewers. The problem with Days is that the writing ain't so great. It hasn't been for ages. Certain characters have been getting the blame for the ratings' downturn, but it really boils down to people aren't buying what Dena/Ken/Gary are selling.

The ratings could change for the better in the coming weeks, who knows? I do wonder if they don't, what will Ken Corday blame this time.

It´s not just the story. Main problem of soaps nowadays is they are so scared they will lost even those few remaining viewers they aren´t able to give the potential new viewers the same kind of experience we´ve got when we first tuned in into the show. I started to watch in 1989 and I had no idea who all these people and couples from 80´s are, but I for sure got interested in Jack/jennifer and their soon to be on frontburner romance. And in 1993 when MA, CC and MS were all let go the show really didn´t hurt so much because they already had a lot of new viewers whou couldn´t care less about Bo/Carly and Jack/Jennifer, but they were totally in love with Bo/Bilie and Austin/Carrie. And the same happened yet again in 2000 with Shawn/Belle and Phillip/Chloe. This is the natural circle which keeps the show fresh and demos young. I´m sure Julie Horton was crazily popular character in 70´s, yet no writers in 80´s ever thought "let´s bring back her and Doug back and forget about Hope, Jennifer, Bo, Steve, Jack, Kayla, etc." You know, all these now ultrapopular 80´s characters who were once newbies too.

When Tomlin followed that formula last year, got rid of all the played out supercouples and focused the show on Phillip/stephanie, Daniel/Chloe, Brady/Nicol and Sami/Rafe the show finally started to gain some new followers again. And they would stay if the show were able to offer them the same kind sweeping romance I experienced with Jack/jennifer or someone else with Steve/Kayla or John/Marlena. But instead someone thought "things are great now, but maybe if we bring some few people from past and rewrite things so they fit in it will be even better." And they shot itself down in the process.

It´s not just the story. Main problem of soaps nowadays is they are so scared they will lost even those few remaining viewers they aren´t able to give the potential new viewers the same kind of experience we´ve got when we first tuned in into the show. I started to watch in 1989 and I had no idea who all these people and couples from 80´s are, but I for sure got interested in Jack/jennifer and their soon to be on frontburner romance. And in 1993 when MA, CC and MS were all let go the show really didn´t hurt so much because they already had a lot of new viewers whou couldn´t care less about Bo/Carly and Jack/Jennifer, but they were totally in love with Bo/Bilie and Austin/Carrie. And the same happened yet again in 2000 with Shawn/Belle and Phillip/Chloe. This is the natural circle which keeps the show fresh and demos young. I´m sure Julie Horton was crazily popular character in 70´s, yet no writers in 80´s ever thought "let´s bring back her and Doug back and forget about Hope, Jennifer, Bo, Steve, Jack, Kayla, etc." You know, all these now ultrapopular 80´s characters who were once newbies too.

When Tomlin followed that formula last year, got rid of all the played out supercouples and focused the show on Phillip/stephanie, Daniel/Chloe, Brady/Nicol and Sami/Rafe the show finally started to gain some new followers again. And they would stay if the show were able to offer them the same kind sweeping romance I experienced with Jack/jennifer or someone else with Steve/Kayla or John/Marlena. But instead someone thought "things are great now, but maybe if we bring some few people from past and rewrite things so they fit in it will be even better." And they shot itself down in the process.

Totally agree.

That's why I hope they NEVER cave and bring back John and Marlena. They need to stay away until the show's series finale.

I really doubt bringing back John and Marlena will hurt the show, heck they might even gain some viewers, you never can tell these days

Im not sure what John and Marlena could add though. They really were beyond played out by the time they left. All I can see them offering these two is a return in a recurring capacity to react to whats going on in their children's lives. I think their time as a lead couple is over and they need to be kept in the back and grow old together like Tom and Alice

I really doubt bringing back John and Marlena will hurt the show, heck they might even gain some viewers, you never can tell these days

I don't think they would hurt or help the show, that's just it. They will do nothing but cause more unnecessary budget problems. The show is fine now, they have alot of cheap vets and the show is balanced for the most part. John and Marlena aren't needed, though I wish they had been around for Alice's memorial and when Baby Grace died.

Edited September 12, 201015 yr by Eric83

I really doubt bringing back John and Marlena will hurt the show, heck they might even gain some viewers, you never can tell these days

I would start watching again if they brought John and Marlena back.

And I think they could add a lot to the show.

It´s not just the story. Main problem of soaps nowadays is they are so scared they will lost even those few remaining viewers they aren´t able to give the potential new viewers the same kind of experience we´ve got when we first tuned in into the show. I started to watch in 1989 and I had no idea who all these people and couples from 80´s are, but I for sure got interested in Jack/jennifer and their soon to be on frontburner romance. And in 1993 when MA, CC and MS were all let go the show really didn´t hurt so much because they already had a lot of new viewers whou couldn´t care less about Bo/Carly and Jack/Jennifer, but they were totally in love with Bo/Bilie and Austin/Carrie. And the same happened yet again in 2000 with Shawn/Belle and Phillip/Chloe. This is the natural circle which keeps the show fresh and demos young. I´m sure Julie Horton was crazily popular character in 70´s, yet no writers in 80´s ever thought "let´s bring back her and Doug back and forget about Hope, Jennifer, Bo, Steve, Jack, Kayla, etc." You know, all these now ultrapopular 80´s characters who were once newbies too.

When Tomlin followed that formula last year, got rid of all the played out supercouples and focused the show on Phillip/stephanie, Daniel/Chloe, Brady/Nicol and Sami/Rafe the show finally started to gain some new followers again. And they would stay if the show were able to offer them the same kind sweeping romance I experienced with Jack/jennifer or someone else with Steve/Kayla or John/Marlena. But instead someone thought "things are great now, but maybe if we bring some few people from past and rewrite things so they fit in it will be even better." And they shot itself down in the process.

I thought last year's success was due to a strong story -- the babyswitch. It has twists and turns and the show invested in the character central to the story, Nicole. I didn't care for the story that much myself (I hate baby switch stories LOL), but it did have a "tune in tomorrow" factor that was key. And I think adding CC and LS gave the show a temporary boost in numbers. When fans of those actresses finally figured out that the stories for them were weak, I'm guessing that they tuned out and it hurt the show ratings' wise. JMHO. And I think the show hasn't a clue what draws younger viewers. Young couples might help but if the stories are stale and boring, younger viewers won't watch. And why should they when they can watch reality shows like "Jersey Shore" instead.

I get the impression that Days keeps changing its mind about what draws viewers. Last year's mantra was story, not couples. This year's mantra is couples, not story. Whatever works I guess. Let's hope for the show that something sticks.

Edited September 12, 201015 yr by KSlater

DAYS was very boring from March to Mid-August with nothing much happening. They used that time to build up this EJ-getting-busted- storyline......they were building up to these past two weeks and well, it didn't pay off in the ratings. The show just doesn't have any momentum like they did in 2009.

I was off last week and tried to watch Days. To me it was awful. Again soaps need to stop hiring based on looks. The talent with the kids on Days just isn't there. I will say the same for OLTL!

How can it be said that OLTL had a good week? It's in last place tied with a cancelled soap. To me, OLTL continues on a

dismal track. No one can be happy with this rating. In fact, how can it be justified to keep these low rated soaps on the air.

These numbers were when Port Charles was cancelled. In fact, all soap ratings are pretty dismal. Y and R can't even get up

over a 4.0 anymore. 1.7 is a horrible rating.

I agree with you! I'm not happy at all with this show. I think that is why the show is going in a different direction this fall. I'm personally hoping with the VETS back front and center the ratings will come! Its been way to long since Viki, Clint, Bo, Nora, Dorian and Charlie had something to do!