Author Topic: Las Vegas Sun Article - 1/17/05 (Read 10641 times)

TraderRob · « **on:** January 26, 2005, 01:10:19 AM »

Interesting article I read - makes sense that Vegas is one of GSN's better markets. Also note the 4th quarter performance statistic about halfway down...

Rob

http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/articl...ontentID=147799

(EDITED: Link provided instead of entire article. --DZ)

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #1 on:** January 26, 2005, 02:40:55 AM »

[quote name=\'TraderRob\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 01:10 AM\']Interesting article I read - makes sense that Vegas is one of GSN's better markets. Also note the 4th quarter performance statistic about halfway down...[/quote]
Too bad you couldn't bother to provide a source.

tyshaun1 · « **Reply #2 on:** January 26, 2005, 08:35:07 AM »

[quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 02:40 AM\']Too bad you couldn't bother to provide a source.

[snapback]73203[/snapback]

[/quote]

Ummm........ I think Liz Benston from The Las Vegas Sun is source enough. A link, however, is another story.

Tyshaun

sshuffield70 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 26, 2005, 09:57:50 AM »

Well, one must admit the story is rather odd. I know we've been bitching about demographics and how GSN was trying to skew younger. Evidently, that isn't working. The overall numbers seem to be down, the demo (if it was really that high) seems to be going nowhere, and GSN has wasted a lot of money in the process. I've long believed that if GSN wanted to skew younger without a large outlay of cash, they should go back to making originals, and eventually go all original. It's how all the other nets live. And they can still make 130 eps a year doing it.

TraderRob · « **Reply #4 on:** January 26, 2005, 10:27:06 AM »

- The source was indicated at the top of the article
- What difference does a link vs. copying and pasting make?

One other thing I forgot to ask was that the article references Vegas as GSN's #4 market. Does anybody know what the top 3 happen to be?

Rob

xibit777 · « **Reply #5 on:** January 26, 2005, 10:49:01 AM »

50th looks to be what GSN was around during the Oct 04 ratings done by Starz. It really is amazing how they don't attempt at all to make the channel better by buying new programming that hasn't been seen in at least 5 years. They value cheapness over different programming and higher ratings obviously. Well it's starting to pay off. GSN's low ratings and refusal to add any different game shows during the daily schedule is starting to bite them in the ... I can't say they don't deserve it. I also wouldn't be surprised to see other cable networks owned by Cox to start moving GSN to digital too.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041111/lath073_1.html (ratings for oct 04)

dzinkin · « **Reply #6 on:** January 26, 2005, 11:32:43 AM »

[quote name=\'TraderRob\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 10:27 AM\']- What difference does a link vs. copying and pasting make?

[snapback]73223[/snapback]

[/quote]
The latter violates copyright laws while the former does not. For that reason, the latter is also against the Eligibility Requirements (see #11) while the former is not.

clemon79 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 26, 2005, 11:33:28 AM »

[quote name=\'TraderRob\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 08:27 AM\']- The source was indicated at the top of the article
[/quote]
Yes it was, don't worry about DSmith, his Cheerios seem to have a fair amount of piss in them of late.

Quote

- What difference does a link vs. copying and pasting make?

As a rule I think our moderators prefer a link to what might be copyrighted material as opposed to pasting for reasons of legality, particularly if you're pasting the whole article as opposed to relevant passages. (Personally, I'm with you, I think it's a wee bit paranoid (and I say that with utmost respect to our moderation team), but they pay the bills and don't ask too much of us in return, so I think it's reaosnable to indulge them.)

Quote

One other thing I forgot to ask was that the article references Vegas as GSN's #4 market. Does anybody know what the top 3 happen to be?

Purely a guess, but with a gun to my head I'd say New York and LA are 1-2, and Chicago at 3 wouldn't surprise me. I would imagine Vegas edges out San Francisco based on the gambling aspect and the large number of retireees.

TraderRob · « **Reply #8 on:** January 26, 2005, 12:01:41 PM »

[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 11:32 AM\'][quote name=\'TraderRob\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 10:27 AM\']- What difference does a link vs. copying and pasting make?

[snapback]73223[/snapback]

[/quote]
The latter violates copyright laws while the former does not. For that reason, the latter is also against the Eligibility Requirements (see #11) while the former is not.

[snapback]73234[/snapback]

[/quote]

My apologies - I don't post here very often but I will keep that in mind for next time...

Rob

dzinkin · « **Reply #9 on:** January 26, 2005, 12:06:37 PM »

[quote name=\'TraderRob\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 12:01 PM\'][quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 11:32 AM\'][quote name=\'TraderRob\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 10:27 AM\']- What difference does a link vs. copying and pasting make?

[snapback]73223[/snapback]

[/quote]
The latter violates copyright laws while the former does not. For that reason, the latter is also against the Eligibility Requirements (see #11) while the former is not.

[snapback]73234[/snapback]

[/quote]

My apologies - I don't post here very often but I will keep that in mind for next time...

Rob

[snapback]73239[/snapback]

[/quote]
No prob. We'll only suspend you for five nanoseconds for this offense. :-D

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 26, 2005, 01:15:42 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 11:33 AM\']Yes it was, don't worry about DSmith, his Cheerios seem to have a fair amount of piss in them of late.
[/quote]
Sorry if I seem overly protective of copyright law. As someone who write commentary for a motorsports website, I've had articles c/p'ed in the exact same manner; much to my chargin.

clemon79 · « **Reply #11 on:** January 26, 2005, 01:41:22 PM »

[quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 11:15 AM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 11:33 AM\']Yes it was, don't worry about DSmith, his Cheerios seem to have a fair amount of piss in them of late.
[/quote]
Sorry if I seem overly protective of copyright law. As someone who write commentary for a motorsports website, I've had articles c/p'ed in the exact same manner; much to my chargin.

[snapback]73247[/snapback]

[/quote]
Steaming crap, Mark, and you know it. "Too bad you couldn't bother to provide a source" has nothing to do with cut/paste issues. Especially when a source was plainly present.

uncamark · « **Reply #12 on:** January 26, 2005, 07:11:07 PM »

[quote name=\'xibit777\' date=\'Jan 26 2005, 10:49 AM\']50th looks to be what GSN was around during the Oct 04 ratings done by Starz. It really is amazing how they don't attempt at all to make the channel better by buying new programming that hasn't been seen in at least 5 years. They value cheapness over different programming and higher ratings obviously. Well it's starting to pay off. GSN's low ratings and refusal to add any different game shows during the daily schedule is starting to bite them in the ... I can't say they don't deserve it. I also wouldn't be surprised to see other cable networks owned by Cox to start moving GSN to digital too.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041111/lath073_1.html (ratings for oct 04)

[snapback]73226[/snapback]

[/quote]

Cox owns systems, they don't own networks.

And do you have anything that proves that they were getting better numbers with an all-vintage game show lineup? If you're talking about the early days, they weren't in enough homes to be rated by Nielsen until 2000 or so, way back in the days of Burt Luddin and "All-New 3s a Crowd" the first time around (and when people were complaining about the schedule around here).

Chelsea Thrasher · « **Reply #13 on:** January 26, 2005, 09:07:38 PM »

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.tv...76050ed7c4fa4c7

Primetime, May 2001. The Final 2 or 3 numbers in each row is the total number of viewers watching in terms of thousands.
---
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.tv...044ed561908ff00

Primetime, Late April/Early
You may need to click "Show Quoted Text"

Again, the last two/three numbers in a given row are total viewers.

The average number of viewers, respective of both sets of data, is in the 100,000 mark, give or take a few millon. This means that if you assume the number given in the LV article (145,000) is the average number of viewers for GSN....GSN, in THREE YEARS, gaining almost 10 million households, and spending ungodly amounts of money on new classics, originals...a rebranding effort, multiple executive changes (New President, Two VP's of Programming, multiple other executive changes) since April 30, 2001, and so forth.....for 45,000-ish viewers.

tyshaun1 · « **Reply #14 on:** January 27, 2005, 10:09:21 AM »

ISTR that the 145,000 or so viewers is probably referring to total day average, not primetime. While not great, it's not that bad. Just look at several other networks (G4TTV, E!, etc.), they LOVE to pull around a .3 rating during the day. Heck, a few (G4TTV) would love to pull a .3 at night.

Tyshaun

Author Topic: Las Vegas Sun Article - 1/17/05 (Read 10641 times)

xibit777

dzinkin

dzinkin

uncamark