Jump to content

September 20 - 24, 2010


Toups

Recommended Posts

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

Numbers are based on Live+Same Day ratings

Ratings for the week September 20-24, 2010

Total Viewers

1. Y&R 5,053,000 (+5,000/-225,000)

2. B&B 3,051,000 (-142,000/-335,000)

3. GH 2,378,000 (-263,000/-292,000)

4. DAYS 2,376,000 (-134,000/-488,000)

5. AMC 2,270,000 (-117,000/-252,000)

6. OLTL 2,220,000 (-107,000/-242,000)

HH

1. Y&R 3.5/13 (same/-.3)

2. B&B 2.2/8 (-.1/-.3)

3. GH 1.8/6 (-.2/-.2)

4. AMC 1.7/6 (-.1/-.3) <- ties low rating (Last time: August 23-27, 2010)

4. OLTL 1.7/6 (-.1/-.2)

4. DAYS 1.7/6 (-.1/-.4) <- new low

Women 18-49 Viewers

1. Y&R 1,143,000 (+44,000/+1,000)

2. GH 792,000 (-95,000/-80,000)

3. B&B 676,000 (-20,000/+2,000)

4. DAYS 672,000 (-40,000/-189,000)

5. OLTL 666,000 (+2,000/-106,000)

6. AMC 576,000 (-16,000/-171,000)

Women 18-49 Rating

1. Y&R 1.7/12 (same/same)

2. GH 1.2/8 (-.1/-.1)

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

3. B&B 1.0/7 (-.1/same)

3. OLTL 1.0/7 (same/-.2)

6. AMC 0.9/6 (same/-.2)

Girls 12-17 Viewers

1. Y&R 30,000 (-17,000/+1,000)

2. GH 27,000 (+7,000/-16,000)

3. DAYS 25,000 (+5,000/-6,000)

3. OLTL 25,000 (+5,000/1,000)

5. B&B 22,000 (-11,000/-1,000)

6. AMC 13,000 (+4,000/-2,000)

Women 18-34 Rating

1. Y&R 0.9/6 (same/-.2)

2. DAYS 0.7/5 (same/-.3) <- ties low rating (2nd straight week)

2. GH 0.7/4 (-.2/-.3) <- ties low rating (Last time: May 24-28, 2010)

4. B&B 0.6/4 (same/same)

5. AMC 0.5/4 (same/-.3) <- ties low rating (5th straight week)

5. OLTL 0.5/4 (-.1/-.4) <- new low

Men 18+ Viewers

1. Y&R 1,119,000 (-95,000/-178,000)

2. B&B 614,000 (-66,000/-133,00)

3. DAYS 514,000 (-63,000/-96,000)

4. AMC 437,000 (-22,000/-34,000)

5. GH 415,000 (-98,000/-70,000)

6. OLTL 382,000 (-53,000/-39,000)

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

Day-To-Day Ratings - HH/Total Viewers

AMC

Monday: 1.8/2,276,000

Tuesday: 1.7/2,385,000

Wednesday: 1.8/2,225,000

Thursday: 1.7/2,262,000

Friday: 1.7/2,201,000

B&B

Monday: 2.2/3,165,000

Tuesday: 2.2/3,008,000

Wednesday: 2.2/3,080,000

Thursday: 2.0/2,889,000

Friday: 2.2/3,111,000

DAYS

Monday: 2.0/2,685,000

Tuesday: 1.7/2,284,000

Wednesday: 1.6/2,366,000

Thursday: 1.6/2,256,000

Friday: 1.6/2,289,000

GH

Monday: 2.1/2,606,000

Tuesday: 1.9/2,378,000

Wednesday: 1.8/2,296,000

Thursday: 1.7/2,321,000

Friday: 1.7/2,287,000

OLTL

Monday: 1.9/2,307,000

Tuesday: 1.8/2,286,000

Wednesday: 1.7/2,186,000

Thursday: 1.6/2,203,000

Friday: 1.6/2,119,000

Y&R

Monday: 3.7/5,161,000

Tuesday: 3.7/5,286,000

Wednesday: 3.6/5,097,000

Thursday: 3.4/4,893,000

Friday: 3.3/4,831,000

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Not jumping, but I see absolutely no reason why OLTL would have climbed .2 ...

Eric, .2 comes out to slightly more than 200,000 viewers which isn't all that many viewers. Firstly, we've seen OLTL come in at 1.9 quite a few times and drop as low as 1.7 so clearly there is some week to week flux. Secondly, 2.3 million viewers tuned in daily to ATWT and I still think out of that number atleast 200,000 were either fans of both shows (the NUKE/KISH fans), ex OLTL fans or people bored at 2pm willing to sample another soap. On Monday, OLTL had one of the characters holding a blue globe and TPTB have been featuring the DA (ATWT ex Margo) almost every day so ABC must think that they can gain a few viewers. While the shows are radically different, I can easily see some people checking out OLTL. Also, I'm wondering if examples from the past (AW, for example) relate to today. Firstly, AW was being replaced by a new show, Passions, which absorbed viewers. Also, I really do wonder if GH would be the top ABC soap if there were any other soaps competing in the timeslot. Is it compelling storylines and good writing that keep GH on top? Or is it that GL and SB are dead so GH is the only soap option in the time slot? We will see over the next few weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Eric, .2 comes out to slightly more than 200,000 viewers which isn't all that many viewers. Firstly, we've seen OLTL come in at 1.9 quite a few times and drop as low as 1.7 so clearly there is some week to week flux. Secondly, 2.3 million viewers tuned in daily to ATWT and I still think out of that number atleast 200,000 were either fans of both shows (the NUKE/KISH fans), ex OLTL fans or people bored at 2pm willing to sample another soap. On Monday, OLTL had one of the characters holding a blue globe and TPTB have been featuring the DA (ATWT ex Margo) almost every day so ABC must think that they can gain a few viewers. While the shows are radically different, I can easily see some people checking out OLTL. Also, I'm wondering if examples from the past (AW, for example) relate to today. Firstly, AW was being replaced by a new show, Passions, which absorbed viewers. Also, I really do wonder if GH would be the top ABC soap if there were any other soaps competing in the timeslot. Is it compelling storylines and good writing that keep GH on top? Or is it that GL and SB are dead so GH is the only soap option in the time slot? We will see over the next few weeks.

While the globe thing may have been a nod to ATWT, I think you are taking things out of context. What would Nora being on everyday have to do with Margo? I doubt OLTL will see an influx of viewers from ATWT. Just does not makes sense and has never happened with any other soaps in the past decade or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Even ATWT?! Oh wait...

Your one liners are rather stale..think of a new routine.

I wouldn't go that far but honestly I've seen less wishful thinking in Disney movies. All that's missing is a musical number where inanimate objects come to life. Oh wait, OLTL already did that.

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Recent Posts

    • I'm not willing to go that far... yet. China is drastic in the way they deal with dissidents but they're not Russia...yet. China has been known to 'disappear' people who they feel are interfering with the way they run their government business but not usually such high profile individuals (and usually not famous women, who they consider their flowers). Also, unlike Russia, China only seems to take the most extreme measures when some serious criminal charge is made (like the man who was charged with tainting the milk supply, who was executed). Ai Wei Wei is a dissident artists who makes dissident art that is openly critical of Chinese politics and government and he is treated as a hostile force, but even by his own admission he is deliberately provocative, as he believes agit-art is the best way that he can try to get the attention of people who would force change. China is not really in the business of disappearing people like Russia does. At least, not permanently. Jack Ma is one example of someone who went missing for weeks, if not months, then suddenly turned up on his yacht out in the middle of somewhere. You've heard of "Too Big to Fail"? Well, Ma was too big/famous to disappear. With her level of notoriety, I think it would be next to impossible to just do away with her, she's not poor anonymous "Tank Man" in Tiananmen Square. She is Han Chinese woman whose notoriety has only been growing, she's not the unfortunate Uyghurs who are often locked away for months in "re-education" camps, but I suspect that the government will try to 're-program' her mind to forget her allegations, likely under pressure if not all out threats made to her and her family. If she emerges publicly, if not living in anonymity, there will likely be every effort to have her appear timid and cowed in public, much the way she appears now, with broad forced smiles, in front of a menagerie of plush toys.
    • Tubi has some great stuff and I'm currently watching the He-Man She-Ra Christmas Special from 1985 
    • I recently came across the 1997 book Worlds Without End: The Art and History of the Soap Opera. In the book Bill Bell comments on two pivotal events in Y&R history. I hope nobody minds that I quoted his comments in full. On Taking Y&R to One Hour "Once assured that Y&R was a runaway hit, CBS inevitably wanted to talk to me about an hour. I'll spare you the gruesome details, but after months of enormous pressure from the network and the affiliates, I somehow found myself committed to doing the hour show. What ultimately happened is that our ratings went down and it took us three years to become number one again.   How could this have happened? One reason is that when we went to an hour, we had a number of cast defections. The issue of performing in a one-hour show had not been part of their contracts. And some of our leading actors understandably felt that their popularity on Restless would open the door to fame and fortune in nighttime or films. Obviously we had to recast prime characters in our two core families, the Brooks and the Fosters. It was then that I decided if even one more actor from these families decided to leave the show, I'd have to do something radical.   A short time later, Jaime Lyn Bauer, who played Lauralee Brooks and was one of the very few original cast members remaining, came to me and said she was physically exhausted, which she was, and that she wasn't going to renew her contract when it was up in August. This was February.   There was no other answer. I had to replace what had been the core of our show since its inception. Two complete families. About eleven actors in all. But replace them with what?   As I studied the remaining cast, I realized I had two characters - Paul Williams, played by Doug Davidson, and Jack Abbott, played by Terry Lester - both of whom had a relatively insignificant presence on the show. They didn't have families. Hell, they didn't even have bedrooms. But these became the two characters I would build our two new families around. I remember the head of daytime for CBS advising me "with the strongest possible conviction" that I was making a grave mistake by replacing these families. There was a great risk, no question, but my conviction was that it could be even more disastrous if I didn't.   I immediately began establishing new families while interweaving the old. We made this transformation without losing so much as a share point. In fact, our ratings and share points kept building, with our two new families emerging as the dominant characters on the show.   This is where Victor Newman came into the picture."   On Victor Newman "You are not going to believe this, but this character, who today is daytime's number one romantic lead, was to be a short-term noncontract role. It would last between eight to twelve weeks, at which time he was to be shot by his beautiful wife. In short, Victor Newman was in concept a despicable, contemptible, unfaithful wife abuser.   When I saw Eric Braeden's first performance - the voice, the power, the inner strength - I knew immediately that I didn't want to lose this man. He was exactly what the show needed. Not the hateful man we saw on-screen, but the man he could and would become over time.   The first thing was to get Eric under contract, but he didn't want to go under contract. He was very uneasy about television, the daytime serial, the people he worked with, the producers. This was a whole other world for Eric. And Eric is a cautious man.   Over time, Eric became more comfortable with the medium, and more trusting with the producers, and agreed to sign a contract. If memory serves, it was for six months. I immediately changed my story in the hope of salvaging this character.  The rest is history."
    • @JaneAusten the way and in the form most current media exist today is the reason why I have to read multiple sources every week, if I want even half the story.  Some days I can't even stomach much other than to read the headline the the lede. I can remember years ago when I would consume the news like it was my job because to be able to write, I felt like being well read was a must. To some extent, I still feel this way but I am far more circumspect about every single news source- I pretty much treat them all as if tabloid tendencies lurk beneath the surface.    
  • On Soap Opera Network

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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