No way will they axe the show
POSTED BY: SadGeezer
UPDATED: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 19:09
VIEWED: 17082
PAGE 4 of 6
The quote from before is all they say about Firefly. Also the article's kind of long, and I wasn't sure if I should paste the whole thing because some boards don't like that. Sorry. If you want to read it here it is...
NBC gains more ground in sweeps
By Rick Kissell
HOLLYWOOD (Variety) - NBC is well on its way to another sweeps victory among young adults after victories on Thursday and Friday and its strongest Saturday of the season.
According to Nielsen, winning performances on Thursday for "Friends" (12.1 rating/31 share in adults 18-49), "ER" (11.9/30) and "Scrubs" (10.2/25) and a strong second-place finish for "Will & Grace" (10.2/24) paced NBC to another Thursday triumph in the key demo.
NBC also prevailed easily on Friday, with "Dateline" (preliminary 3.3/11) and "Law & Order: Special Victims Unit" (preliminary 5.4/17) taking their hours, and was competitive on Saturday with new movie "Hunter: Return to Justice" (preliminary 2.8/8). The picture, which reunited Fred Dryer and Stepfanie Kramer from the 1980s series, fared even better in adults 25-54 (3.4/9) and total viewers (10.5 million), helping NBC take the night by these measures.
For the sweep, NBC is averaging roughly a 5.1 rating among adults 18-49 through Saturday's action, well ahead of CBS (4.1), ABC (3.8) and Fox (3.4). NBC also has made a game of the total viewers race, pulling even with CBS at 13.4 million through Saturday. The four-week sweep ends Nov. 27.
CBS was a strong second on Thursday in adults 18-49 (8.3/20) and 25-54 (9.7/21), posting its best November sweeps score in these demos in at least 15 years. It also moved back on top for the night in total viewers (22.4 million), 1 million ahead of NBC.
"Survivor: Thailand" (21.62 million, 8.6/22 in adults 18-49) saw its best numbers in four weeks and "CSI" (29.94 million, 11.1/26) easily led from 9 to 10 and was the night's most-watched show.
CBS stumbled on Friday and Saturday, though, placing fourth in adults 18-49 and 25-54 on each night.
ABC, which like Fox posted minuscule ratings on Thursday, bounced back with solid showings on Friday and Saturday. "America's Funniest Home Videos" won the 8 p.m. hour in 18-49 on Friday (preliminary 3.2/11) and a repeat of "The Sixth Sense" on Saturday won the night among viewers under 35 and was up vs. its most recent telecast in May.
Fox continues to generate passable ratings on Friday, with "Firefly" hitting some of its best male demos since September and "John Doe" topping its hour in adults 18-34 (preliminary 2.6/10) and all male demos. For the night, Fox led in men 18-34, 18-49 and 25-54.
Fox also edged out both NBC and ABC in 18-49 on Saturday (preliminary 2.9/8) with its combo of "Cops" and "America's Most Wanted."
Reuters/Variety
11/17/02 22:32 ET
Warrick: You didn't have to wound that man.
Mal: Yeah, I know. It was just funny.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
AOL's article sounds fairly positive, but there's a blurb on "The Futon Critic" that's sounding the funeral march for Firefly:
www.thefutoncritic.com
"Critical 'firefly' comes up short
It continues to be a tale of two different series on FOX's Friday lineup. "Firefly's" 3.0 rating and 5 share in the metered markets was its worst score to date, not to mention off by a considerable 39% from the comparable episode of "Dark Angel" last season (4.9/8, 11/16/01). Meanwhile, "John Doe" hit the 4.1 rating mark for the third consecutive week in the overnights, on par with an encore of "24" in year-to-year comparisons (4.2/7, 11/16/01). Overall this season based on metered market ratings, "Firefly" has yet to beat the comparable episode of "Dark Angel" while "Doe" has missed its year-to-year mark just twice (both being "24" encores of the series first two episodes) in eight airings. Also of note is "Doe's" second place finish in the 18-49 demographic according to the fast nationals while "Firefly" fell to fourth place in both half-hours. While we'd love to keep our chin up about "Firefly," don't expect any good news in the coming week."
I don't know who to believe. I wish FOX would make an announcement and get it over with.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by leebee:
AOL's article sounds fairly positive, but there's a blurb on "The Futon Critic" that's sounding the funeral march for Firefly:
www.thefutoncritic.com
"Critical 'firefly' comes up short
It continues to be a tale of two different series on FOX's Friday lineup. "Firefly's" 3.0 rating and 5 share in the metered markets was its worst score to date,
I might be wrong, but I thought Firefly was steadly at 2.9 in the overnights for the last few weeks. That mean's that 3.0 was not it's worst score to date, which of course makes me question the whole article then...
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Jason:
I might be wrong, but I thought Firefly was steadly at 2.9 in the overnights for the last few weeks. That mean's that 3.0 was not it's worst score to date, which of course makes me question the whole article then...
Doubt all you want but a 3.0 is its worst overnight score to date. The 2.9 rating you are referring to from before is the fast national rating. They are two different measurements.
Brian Ford Sullivan
Editor-In-Chief
The Futon Critic
http://www.thefutoncritic.com
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by thefutoncritic:Quote:
Originally posted by Jason:
I might be wrong, but I thought Firefly was steadly at 2.9 in the overnights for the last few weeks. That mean's that 3.0 was not it's worst score to date, which of course makes me question the whole article then...
Doubt all you want but a 3.0 is its worst overnight score to date. The 2.9 rating you are referring to from before is the fast national rating. They are two different measurements.
Oh, I did not realize that. If I may ask, what is the difference in the two measurements?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I was chatting with the wife about this and she suggested that the ratings were important to the show because of two things:
Firstly, they are obviously a good gauge for who is watching the show.
But most importantly, they tell the advertiser how many people will see their advertisements. If Fox sell advertising space in a timeslot for 4.0 and the show hits 2.9 then surely they are either going to have to give a refund sell future advertisements for less or axe a show and replace it with one that has better ratings.
Now that may seem like a plausible explanation for axing the show and replacing it with say.... Dark Angel 
but that’s the whole point! If Fox did that with all the shows they would never make any new ones and just show popular repeats.
I think they have to speculate to accumulate and I think that the investment for Firefly is so high (despite it being such a cheap (to produce) show) that they HAVE to let it run to the full series before they can gauge it's success or begin to assess the return on investment. I don't think it's very easy for a company like Fox to commission a series, advertise the hell out of it and then axe it without giving it a chance.
Whedon would do his nut! 
I must admit, I thought the show was pretty mediocre for the first few episodes - but now, rather than eye the barmaid I'll telling the lads in the pub about this super new Star Wars midget light sabre that gives people nose-bleeds and the screaming heeby jeebees. Firefly just got interesting for many of the sci-fi-geek-brigade and that must count for something. 
SadGeezers Guide to Firefly
http://www.sadgeezer.com/firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Jason:
Oh, I did not realize that. If I may ask, what is the difference in the two measurements?
From the site:
Quote:
A note about the ratings listed here: Remember that overnight ratings (often referred to as metered market ratings) is the data from "set top boxes" in approximately 20,000 households in 55 of the largest markets in the U.S. (see the complete list). This sample covers 68.96% of all households in the U.S. These "set top boxes" track what is being watched only, not who in the household is watching what (i.e. demographic information). Overnights obviously skew to the urban audience due to the viewership being in the largest markets.
Fast national ratings is the preliminary data from 5,000 "people meters" in households across all 210 markets (see the complete list). This sample covers 100.00% of all households in the U.S. These "people meters" measure not only what is being watched but also who in each household is watching what in order to gather demographic information as well as the number of actual viewers (not just households) watching the program. This preliminary data does not take into account scheduling changes across the country, most notably those in the pacific time zone due to live events such as sports (hence why we list them by time slot, not program). Preliminary (or "fast" as they are more commonly known) national ratings are only available for ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC. After several days, a final national rating and share is determined for all programs on all the broadcast networks (i.e. ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, UPN, the WB and PAX), as well as the total number of viewers (in millions) that watched the program. Final national ratings are generally issued in a weekly report each Wednesday featuring rankings for each program on how it did compared to the rest of the programs that aired in said week.
Since as we mentioned fast nationals are not released for UPN, the WB and PAX we use overnights in our reporting as a means of comparison (at least initially, obviously when the final national rating information is released that's the final word). We feel there's no point in comparing the fast nationals for ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC to the overnights for UPN, the WB and PAX as Zap2It.com does. They are two different pieces of data from two different samples. Overnights and nationals are collected separately so one can see how a show is performing in the specified larger markets (via overnights) and nationally (via nationals).
Hope that helps.
Brian Ford Sullivan
Editor-In-Chief
The Futon Critic
http://www.thefutoncritic.com
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
I think they have to speculate to accumulate and I think that the investment for Firefly is so high (despite it being such a cheap (to produce) show) that they HAVE to let it run to the full series before they can gauge it's success or begin to assess the return on investment. I don't think it's very easy for a company like Fox to commission a series, advertise the hell out of it and then axe it without giving it a chance.
Believe it or not though, sometimes NOT airing a show saves more money than airing a show. Such was the case for when FOX canceled "Girls Club" so quickly:
Quote:
Although Fox will take an initial hit of about $18 million in costs for 11 unaired episodes of the canceled drama Girls' Club, the rapid decision to abandon the show could save the network as much as $20 million.
The David E. Kelley produced series was averaging only a 3.7 rating/5 share in households after two episodes in its Monday 9 p.m. slot, according to Nielsen Media Research, as well as a low 2.3/5 in adults 18-49. Since Fox had guaranteed advertisers a 9 household share, the show was underdelivering by nearly 45 percent. The network had sold 30-second spots in the upfront for Girls' Club at about $175,000 each. So having to pay makegoods for the remaining 11 episodes at that rate could have cost the network as much as $20 million, media buyers estimated. In addition, the show would have clogged up a key time period during the November sweeps.
Brian Ford Sullivan
Editor-In-Chief
The Futon Critic
http://www.thefutoncritic.com
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Actually, I've read some good reviews of Firefly: TV Guide had an article on it a few weeks ago, and their critic seems to think it's a good show. And USA TODAY featured it in their "shows to watch this week", calling it the best show nobody's watching. The problem, as always, is there are just too many dimbulbs out there who wouldn't know good entertainment if it came up and kicked them in the teeth. 
"time to thin the herd"
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm really bummed at the show's bad ratings - it is some of the best stuff I've seen in YEARS!
Yet, even though it's probably got a short lifespan, I can't tear myself away from it the way I probably should. 
It's like a really tasty snack that is bad for you.
I really hope I'm wrong and this survives. Most of my pals who were bereft of their Friday night sci-fi after Farscape got axed (talk about boneheaded maneuver! 
)
I never even KNEW this stuff existed until I went to my sister and bro-in-law's house. Like usual, they found it before I did (I saw half of Bushwacked and my jaw hit the floor). Now, I gotta prep for cancellation like I did with Lone Gunmen/Alien Nation/Space Above and Beyond? BUMMER!!
And Survivor? American Idol? The Bachelor? 
Look, if I wanted to see 9 people snipe at each other, I'd get roomies. If I wanted to see a bunch of young things sing Celene Dion, there's a kareoke bar across the street from my apartment. And that last one...(Socilist/Feminist rant 
)
Co-founder of the Evil Writing Crew - causing hell, one hero at a time!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME