Ratings News!
POSTED BY: Novagrass
UPDATED: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 22:21
VIEWED: 13789
PAGE 2 of 5
In the example they give, channel 2's rating would be a 30/50, compared to Firefly's 4.1/8
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Jerry:
In the example they give, channel 2's rating would be a 30/50, compared to Firefly's 4.1/8
OOOOk... That makes sense! *phew* I was getting very confused.
Well, at least I understand the ratings game now.
So, anyway... even though it got a 4.1, it isn't that bad when compared to the others (5.4 and 4.8) There's not all that much difference there... so, I guess it didn't fail that bad at all.
--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--
"Oh, shoot" - Mal
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
All this talk of an age demographic is kinda ironic. Firefly is sort of the heir of the last big TV western Gunsmoke. Which was cancelled, despite high ratings, because of similar demo issues.
I remember back in the 80s, the network ad people kept St. Elsewhere alive, despite bad ratings. It seemed that the people who did were from the overpriviliged demos, so the show generated the same ad revenue as did the higher-rated shows.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Zicsoft:
All this talk of an age demographic is kinda ironic. Firefly is sort of the heir of the last big TV western Gunsmoke. Which was cancelled, despite high ratings, because of similar demo issues.
So Gunsmoke wasn't drawing enough viewers from the 18-49 demo? And Firefly is drawing the 18-49 demo, but not getting as many viewers?
That *is* ironic. Well, I guess the demo is very slightly more important than overall ratings... which is a good sign for Firefly, I guess.
--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--
"Oh, shoot" - Mal
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That's true, it is possible for network shows to last with not-so-good ratings. Look at NBC's Homicide: Life on the Street. A great show (okay, its last 3 seasons sucked) that had terrible ratings but the critics absolutely loved it.
Damn I miss that show. Too bad it fell apart in its final seasons. That's what you get when you try to make the show "hip and sexy."
************************************************
"How will this end?"
"In fire."
--Babylon 5, 'The Coming of Shadows'
************************************************
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I would think the show will need to draw better than a 4.1 overnight on a regular basis to survive. That's about what Buffy and Angel ususally draw, but not good enough for Fox.
Nitpick: Buffy and Angel's usually numbers are in the 3's (for Buffy) and the 2's for Angel. Buffy's highest rated episode ever was a 4.3. THus I don't think that a 4.1 is "about" what Buffy usually draws (I consider a .5 ratings increase significant enough).
Nathan
"It looks like a great adventure...That's what it is; that's what it feels like. When I saw the pilot, it was really engaging. It was exciting. It was unusual. It threw me off every now and then. I think people will be grabbed by it." - Ron Glass, on the pilot, during an interview with the Indianapolis Star
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
. Sure Dark Angel was canceled with similar ratings -- after two full seasons!
Nitpick 2 (the sequel): Actually Dark Angel's ratings in the first season were much better than its second season ratings (so much so that thefutoncritic.com listed Dark Angel as being among the biggest declines between seasons awhile back- not that you can find it since the webmasters have decided to put on hiatus all the actually good stuff about the site). The first season of Dark Angel typically got ratings around 6.0-7.0. Far superior to the ratings it received on its Friday timeslot.
Aside: THese ratings make me sad. They mean that the Dark Angel children, the single most obnoxious fan segment in history, get proven right and they can brag about their
show and its "unjust" cancellation for eternity.Nathan
"It looks like a great adventure...That's what it is; that's what it feels like. When I saw the pilot, it was really engaging. It was exciting. It was unusual. It threw me off every now and then. I think people will be grabbed by it." - Ron Glass, on the pilot, during an interview with the Indianapolis Star
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:DA fans aren't so bad. They're brighter than Battlestar Gallactica Fans and less pretentious than B5 fans!
Originally posted by millernate:
THese ratings make me sad. They mean that the Dark Angel children, the single most obnoxious fan segment in history, get proven right and they can brag about their
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sorry Zicsoft, I'm a B5 fan but I didn't know I was "pretentious."
I don't think we should start getting into peeing contests about which fans are better/worse.
Maybe we should all wear shirts that say "Your TV show sucks" and that way we could all be safe. 
************************************************
"How will this end?"
"In fire."
--Babylon 5, 'The Coming of Shadows'
************************************************
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by millernate:
Nitpick: Buffy and Angel's usually numbers are in the 3's (for Buffy) and the 2's for Angel. Buffy's highest rated episode ever was a 4.3. THus I don't think that a 4.1 is "about" what Buffy usually draws (I consider a .5 ratings increase significant enough).
You appear to be confusing overnights with final ratings. BtVS often scores in the 4's in overnights, and AtS occasionally does. The 4.1 for Firefly is an overnight. Final ratings tend to be lower.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME