Author Topic: Crosswords, Temptation ratings are in (Read 21322 times)

brianhenke · « **on:** September 11, 2007, 03:52:04 PM »

Here were the first-day overnight ratings for the two new games, according to Mediaweek:

Merv Griffin's Crosswords

Sept. 2006 time period: 1.2 Lead in:1.0 Rating: 0.8

Down 20 percent from lead-in, 38 percent from last year.

Temptation

Sept. 2006 time period: 0.9 Lead in: 0.8 Rating: 0.6

Down 25 percent from lead-in, 33 percent from last year.

dzinkin · « **Reply #1 on:** September 11, 2007, 03:58:24 PM »

Since Brian does not know how to copy and paste, here is a link to the original article.

clemon79 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 11, 2007, 04:18:56 PM »

I'm confused. How does a brand-new show get compared to Whatever Random Show Was In It's Time Slot On Affiliates That Carry The New Show? Particularly when we established that they are both running at all hours of the day?

Am I missing something, or is this the sort of thing Mediaweek needs to keep pumping out to stay in business?

brianhenke · « **Reply #3 on:** September 11, 2007, 04:23:57 PM »

[quote name=\'dzinkin\' post=\'163408\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 03:58 PM\']
Since Brian does not know how to copy and paste, here is a link to the original article.
[/quote]

I got it from a RATV post.

urbanpreppie05 · « **Reply #4 on:** September 11, 2007, 04:26:31 PM »

I'm just shocked that THAT many people watched TMZ. Have we sunk that low as a society?

dzinkin · « **Reply #5 on:** September 11, 2007, 04:31:13 PM »

[quote name=\'brianhenke\' post=\'163415\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 04:23 PM\']
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' post=\'163408\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 03:58 PM\']
Since Brian does not know how to copy and paste, here is a link to the original article.
[/quote]
I got it from a RATV post.
[/quote]
A post which also should have provided a link to the original article; that doesn't excuse you.

At the very least, you should have provided a link to the RATV post.

BrandonFG · « **Reply #6 on:** September 11, 2007, 04:39:28 PM »

I have a few problems with the article, directed at Mediaweek, not Henke.

1. They only sampled a handful of markets, about 1/4 of the actual number of US markets (217 or 18). How does that indicate how the show is doing?
2. The shows have aired for approximately a day and a half. How the hell can that indicate whether a show is a flop or success? I mean, give viewers a chance to find out about the show, and see what's the deal.

dzinkin · « **Reply #7 on:** September 11, 2007, 04:47:53 PM »

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'163419\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 04:39 PM\']
I have a few problems with the article, directed at Mediaweek, not Henke.

1. They only sampled a handful of markets, about 1/4 of the actual number of US markets (217 or 18). How does that indicate how the show is doing?
2. The shows have aired for approximately a day and a half. How the hell can that indicate whether a show is a flop or success? I mean, give viewers a chance to find out about the show, and see what's the deal.
[/quote]
Let me add: how about giving viewers a chance to find the shows? Look at how many of us didn't find them until shortly before air time or even afterward, and we actually were looking for them.

TimK2003 · « **Reply #8 on:** September 11, 2007, 05:05:45 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'163413\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 04:18 PM\']
I'm confused. How does a brand-new show get compared to Whatever Random Show Was In It's Time Slot On Affiliates That Carry The New Show?
[/quote]

It happens more than you think. Some of the reasons why Mediaweek and specific networks will compare shows from this season in a specific timeframe to whatever was in that timeframe is moreso for tracking trends for example:

1) Does a game show fare better on station KZYX in the 4pm timeslot this year than the court show we aired last season?
2) Are more people watching primetime programming on Saturday Night this season overall than they did last season on the XYZ Network?
3) Dr. Phil blew us away last season in ratings, and we are still a distant 2nd in that hour's timeslot, but are we gaining more audience this year with our counterprogramming?

Speaking from a TV sales standpoint, year-to-year comparisons and trends help TV stations determine ad rates and rating point projections for upcoming broadcast periods when it comes time to work with businesses and agencies in charging rates and guaranteeing a minimum amount of viewers for long-term buys.

tvwxman · « **Reply #9 on:** September 11, 2007, 05:10:47 PM »

[quote name=\'dzinkin\' post=\'163408\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 03:58 PM\']
Since Brian does not know how to copy and paste, here is a link to the original article.
[/quote]
Well, maybe Brian should be taught, told to learn, or have posting priviledges removed.

Seriously.

mmb5 · « **Reply #10 on:** September 11, 2007, 05:19:31 PM »

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'163419\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 04:39 PM\']
I have a few problems with the article, directed at Mediaweek, not Henke.

1. They only sampled a handful of markets, about 1/4 of the actual number of US markets (217 or 18). How does that indicate how the show is doing?
2. The shows have aired for approximately a day and a half. How the hell can that indicate whether a show is a flop or success? I mean, give viewers a chance to find out about the show, and see what's the deal.
[/quote]
The 1/4th they probably did are probably all Top 50, which will get you 90% of the country. Temptation's future will be based on it's NYC/LA ratings, not its Glendive/Fargo ratings. As far as "day-and-a-half", these are going to be Monday only ratings. If in the next few weeks they go up, the shows will have life. If they don't, they'll be gone soon. The uncertainty will be if they stay steady, meaning that they didn't attract any word-of-mouth.

As much as we bash the ratings systems used, they did not come by accident. The only thing that bothers me is that they never seem to take margin-of-error into account.

--Mike

tpirfan28 · « **Reply #11 on:** September 11, 2007, 05:22:47 PM »

[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'163430\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 05:10 PM\']
Well, maybe Brian should be taught, told to learn, or have posting priviledges removed.

Seriously.
[/quote]
Seconded. This isn't his first, second, or even his twelfth time. And since he still refuses to learn, maybe a nice stay in the Iso Booth would be appropriate.

Isn't there precedent for this kind of thing?

MikeK · « **Reply #12 on:** September 11, 2007, 05:25:26 PM »

[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'163430\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 05:10 PM\']Well, maybe Brian should be taught, told to learn, or have posting priviledges removed.[/quote]
Brian's been on the internet and computers long enough to know how to copy and paste a URL. This isn't the first time Brian has been told about C/P links and to not post copyrighted material. Maybe if Brian wasn't oblivious to the constructive criticisms of his posts...

weaklink75 · « **Reply #13 on:** September 11, 2007, 05:35:01 PM »

I'd wait to see how the November Sweeps ratings go before we start making headstones....

clemon79 · « **Reply #14 on:** September 11, 2007, 05:35:09 PM »

[quote name=\'MikeK\' post=\'163433\' date=\'Sep 11 2007, 02:25 PM\']
Maybe if Brian wasn't oblivious ~~to the constructive criticisms of his posts~~...
[/quote]
Fixed that for you!