This whole "brand" thing is a bunch of crap. Seriously

Networks don't cancel higher-rated (in the key demographic) shows just because another show has more name recognition.

CBS didn't keep Dallas around over Knots Landing when it was tanking in the ratings. Knots lasted two more years after Dallas was canceled.

And in daytime, I can't think of a single instance in daytime history where a network canceled anything other than their lowest rated soap at the time. (An exception might be Another World being canceled over Sunset Beach, a case where the "brand" didn't help AW at all).

NONE of the current soaps is being looked at as having "growth potential." Everyone knows it's only a matter of time before they're all gone. And they're not going to lose $$$$ on a show with lower 18-49 ratings just because people who don't even bother to watch daytime have heard of it. The idea that any of that would influence their decisions is completely ludicrous.

They did budge.

AMC

12/27/10.....6.....1.9.....05.....6) 0.9/05.....6) 2,637,000 (+.1/+279,000) <- Holiday

1/3/11.........5.....1.9.....06.....6) 0.8/05.....5) 2,467,000 (-170,000)

1/10/11.....*5.....2.0.....06...*4) 1.0/05.....5) 2,703,000 (+.2/+236,000) <- Snow

1/17/11.....*5.....1.9.....06...*5) 0.9/05.....2) 2,584,000 (-119,000)

1/31/11.....*4.....2.0.....06.....6) 0.9/05.....6) 2,653,000 (SAME/+148,000) <- Snow

2/7/11.......*5.....1.9.....06...*5) 0.8/05.....6) 2,570,000 (-083,000)

OLTL

12/27/10...*4.....2.0.....06...*3) 1.1/06.....4) 2,845,000 (+.2/+490,000) <- Holiday

1/3/11.........6.....1.8.....06.....5) 0.9/05.....6) 2,371,000 (-474,000)

1/10/11.....*5.....2.0.....06...*4) 1.0/05.....6) 2,681,000 (+.1/+310,000)<- Snow

1/17/11.....*5.....1.9.....06.....4) 1.0/06.....5) 2,643,000 (-38,000)

1/31/11.....*4.....2.0.....06...*4) 1.0/06.....5) 2,850,000 (+.1/+343,000) <- Snow

2/7/11.......*3.....2.0.....06.....4) 1.0/06.....3) 2,692,000 (-158,000)

Is AMC's ability to get 2.7 to 3 million viewers for patches of 3-5 months and OLTL inability to telling, too? Is OLTL's numbers being in the toilet (less than 2.4 million viewers on average) from March through December 2010 and AMC's only from August to December 2010 telling as well?

That.

It's like birds fighting over who gets to eat a corpse. The numbers are not so different here that AMC will long out-live OLTL, or OLTL will long out-live AMC. Even if they suck, I hope both shows get through this season and the next & I think they will.

Angela, your household and viewer rating comparisons mean NOTHING to the networks. They don't even bother to look at household numbers. They look at one particular demographic, depending on the time of day. In daytime, women 18-49 are all that matter. They don't make money on total viewers.

Is AMC's ability to get 2.7 to 3 million viewers for patches of 3-5 months and OLTL inability to telling, too? Is OLTL's numbers being in the toilet (less than 2.4 million viewers on average) from March through December 2010 and AMC's only from August to December 2010 telling as well?

OLTL struggled from March through Sept. In October and December they averaged 2.4+ million viewers:

Oct 2010 2,427,250 663,500 --- 4th

Dec 2010 2,440,000 623,000 --- 3rd

Additionally, OLTL ranked 3rd in demos for May 2010 sweeps and 4th for November sweeps. AMC's demos have been last or next to last since spring.

However, the difference in viewership and demos between AMC and OLTL is too small a percentage to big the determining factor anyways. It will be what the affiliates can accept.

Edited February 26, 201114 yr by TeamEric

The key is the demos. When ATWT was cancelled it was beating soaps in total viewers and HHs but had those dreadful demos. That's why it was cancelled.

This whole "brand" thing is a bunch of crap. Seriously

Networks don't cancel higher-rated (in the key demographic) shows just because another show has more name recognition.

CBS didn't keep Dallas around over Knots Landing when it was tanking in the ratings. Knots lasted two more years after Dallas was canceled.

And in daytime, I can't think of a single instance in daytime history where a network canceled anything other than their lowest rated soap at the time. (An exception might be Another World being canceled over Sunset Beach, a case where the "brand" didn't help AW at all).

NONE of the current soaps is being looked at as having "growth potential." Everyone knows it's only a matter of time before they're all gone. And they're not going to lose $$$$ on a show with lower 18-49 ratings just because people who don't even bother to watch daytime have heard of it. The idea that any of that would influence their decisions is completely ludicrous.

I think you're right to an extent. If OLTL was doing gangbuster numbers and leaving AMC in the dust, I'd say, definitely, OLTL is the show they're keeping and AMC is the one they're axing. To hell with AMC's better brand recognition. But the numbers tell a different story. The shows get identical HH numbers and almost the same demo numbers. I don't think OLTL's marginally better demo numbers are enough to justify keeping it over a show with better brand recognition and more of a legacy factor attached to it. And I said, factor in all the AMC cross-promotion vs. nothing for OLTL and the fact that the slightly different demo numbers are probably due to their respective time slots and not to the actual shows, then I think you can make an argument for AMC being the to be saved. Listen, our posts defending this show and that show are riddled with sentiment for our faves, but again I think you can make a logical argument for them keeping AMC. This is probably all moot, because I really doubt this infamous forthcoming announcement that has taken on mythical proportions is anything about either show being canned.

Angela, your household and viewer rating comparisons mean NOTHING to the networks. They don't even bother to look at household numbers. They look at one particular demographic, depending on the time of day. In daytime, women 18-49 are all that matter. They don't make money on total viewers.

Carolyn, the listing I did was to oppose the point that AMC didn't budge during the holiday/snow occasions. All the numbers budged including the 18-49 except for in 1 of the 3 occasions. AMC gained .3 in 18-49 altogether while OLTL gained .4 in that window.

Yes, I know the 18-49 song and dance. And the 18-49 for every soap but Y&R, not including this week, are weak. DAYS and GH is slightly above OLTL and OLTL is slightly above AMC & B&B's level of suck. I do believe networks (and obviously advertisers) look at 18-49 first and foremost, but I don't know that I believe they don't care about anything else. I can't be sold that if B&B is a decent 2nd in HH it will be next to be canceled after AMC (and/or OLTL) goes because their 18-49 demo is now the poorest.

I think all that's true, but I have been surprised at how many people know Susan Lucci is Erica Kane and she's on something called My Children... Actually, really surprised in a number of cases (business friends of my dad, "jock" type boyfriends of my sister, etc).

But Lucci IS the household name not Erica Kane or AMC. What show LaLuccia plays and her character are secondary recognition.

That's different than General Hospital which is the primary source of recognition.

This is probably all moot, because I really doubt this infamous forthcoming announcement that has taken on mythical proportions is anything about either show being canned.

This is still what I think. Of course we established in the other thread that means I'm in denial, but I've been here before.

Angela, your household and viewer rating comparisons mean NOTHING to the networks. They don't even bother to look at household numbers. They look at one particular demographic, depending on the time of day. In daytime, women 18-49 are all that matter. They don't make money on total viewers.

OK I'm gonna get so much info proving me wrong for saying this, but I gotta anyway...

Who says? How do we know networks never pay ANY attention to HH, to any other demo, to branding, to name power, ALL they look at is ONE key demo? We DO know that that key demo is of utmost importance. But like the continual talk about OLTL being so under budget, etc, etc, I thiunk at this point it's starting to be more fan speculation than anything else--and the fact that blogs like DC, who know some stuff but largely work on hearsay and speculation, say the same means nothing.

The key is the demos. When ATWT was cancelled it was beating soaps in total viewers and HHs but had those dreadful demos. That's why it was cancelled.

But there were so many other factors--P&G wanting out being the key one.

I do believe networks (and obviously advertisers) look at 18-49 first and foremost, but I don't know that I believe they don't care about anything else. I can't be sold that if B&B is a decent 2nd in HH it will be next to be canceled after AMC (and/or OLTL) goes because their 18-49 demo is now the poorest.

*Exactly*. I have never heard of an insider, or soap exec, or anyone give any solid proof or word that they pay zero attention to all else, bla bla.

This is still what I think. Of course we established in the other thread that means I'm in denial, but I've been here before.

But it would be so very unlike DC to get soap fans into a tissy over nothing...

(Seriously are they becoming like Branco? So bored with soaps that they want to create the drama themselves? Maybe...)

But Lucci IS the household name not Erica Kane or AMC. What show LaLuccia plays and her character are secondary recognition.

That's different than General Hospital which is the primary source of recognition.

I agree about AMC but I think nearly everyone who knows Lucci, knows the name Erica Kane. That name is part of pop culture.

OK I'm gonna get so much info proving me wrong for saying this, but I gotta anyway...

Who says? How do we know networks never pay ANY attention to HH, to any other demo, to branding, to name power, ALL they look at is ONE key demo? We DO know that that key demo is of utmost importance. But like the continual talk about OLTL being so under budget, etc, etc, I thiunk at this point it's starting to be more fan speculation than anything else--and the fact that blogs like DC, who know some stuff but largely work on hearsay and speculation, say the same means nothing.

This is a no brainer. Read the press releases and read TVbytheNumbers. All they every talk about are key demos. Demos clearly take precedent over HH's.

But it would be so very unlike DC to get soap fans into a tissy over nothing...

(Seriously are they becoming like Branco? So bored with soaps that they want to create the drama themselves? Maybe...)

We're the ones that have made it into something, if you think about it. I believe the original piece itself admitted that it didn't know what if any effect the announcement would have on soaps. It was the fans that said the pieces means a soap is getting canceled. At the very least, it creative journalism. At the most, it's a soap getting the axe.

From the DC piece:

As to what exactly all this means for ABC Daytime’s three soap operas, that isn’t so easy to decipher.

Edited February 26, 201114 yr by Kylie

OK I'm gonna get so much info proving me wrong for saying this, but I gotta anyway...

Who says? How do we know networks never pay ANY attention to HH, to any other demo, to branding, to name power, ALL they look at is ONE key demo? We DO know that that key demo is of utmost importance.

You are right, because as the TV landscape changes where viewers are watching online, mobile, etc, cumulative numbers begin to matter. However, many of the media buyers still operate under the old school assumption that it's only about demos. The TV industry is still searching for a business model that will monetize and measure the time-shifting on different platforms. Unfortunately, one may not be in place in time to save the soaps.

This is a no brainer. Read the press releases and read TVbytheNumbers. All they every talk about are key demos. Demos clearly take precedent over HH's.

Which I agreed with. But I do think other factors like brand and HHs still play SOME part. My argument was with the comment that they meant crap all.

You are right, because as the TV landscape changes where viewers are watching online, mobile, etc, cumulative numbers begin to matter. However, many of the media buyers still operate under the old school assumption that it's only about demos. The TV industry is still searching for a business model that will monetize and measure the time-shifting on different platforms. Unfortunately, one may not be in place in time to save the soaps.

It's kinda sad that things like male numbers mean NOTHING anymore--even though the few viewers who are still at home in the day to watch are less and less female only. Of course then it gets too complicated for execs--how to advertise for different markets, etc, etc, but it seems in these sorry times they'd take what they can get.

We're the ones that have made it into something, if you think about it. I believe the original piece itself admitted that it didn't know what if any effect the announcement would have on soaps. It was the fans that said the pieces means a soap is getting canceled. At the very least, it creative journalism. At the most, it's a soap getting the axe.

From the DC piece:

Oh totally agreed. But I'm sure DC knew it would cause a reacxtion like this and much talk online. Otherwise why even bother...

Oh totally agreed. But I'm sure DC knew it would cause a reacxtion like this and much talk online. Otherwise why even bother...

Of course they did. Creative journalism is a great thing. I'm not saying there isn't truth to it. Not at all. The soaps are clearly in trouble.

I'm just saying that article itself wondered what it means for the soap bloc...we're the ones who said DC said a soap is getting the axe. LOL