Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Lower Budget, Higher Ratings  (Read 1499 times)

Kevin Prather

  • Member
  • Posts: 6860
Re: Lower Budget, Higher Ratings
« Reply #15 on: May 04, 2025, 10:53:59 PM »
(Speaking of which, did they ever offer the Excel and the Precis in the same bonus? Seems like that would be a way to save money by having the original and the rebadge together.)
I once watched a week of shows where six of the eight cars started with the letter C. I don't recall the win rate, but I'm sure it helped rebalance the budget.

That's nasty. Reminds me of those all-cash games in the original series with amounts like $69, $96, $696, etc.

Nice.

joshg

  • Member
  • Posts: 664
Re: Lower Budget, Higher Ratings
« Reply #16 on: May 04, 2025, 11:43:50 PM »
(Speaking of which, did they ever offer the Excel and the Precis in the same bonus? Seems like that would be a way to save money by having the original and the rebadge together.)

Indeed LOL   ;D


https://youtu.be/E38UwiKzqoI?si=4H6ccKSYuLfwc740
« Last Edit: May 05, 2025, 12:12:06 AM by joshg »
Because Chiffon Wrinkles...

TLEberle

  • Member
  • Posts: 16155
  • Rules Constable
Re: Lower Budget, Higher Ratings
« Reply #17 on: May 05, 2025, 01:30:03 AM »
No surprise he not only won the car quickly but also scooped a Thunderbird and $10,000 in the championship playoff.
If you didn’t create it, it isn’t your content.

steveleb

  • Member
  • Posts: 573
Re: Lower Budget, Higher Ratings
« Reply #18 on: May 05, 2025, 11:00:01 AM »
There were many instances where budgets were slashed due to factors besides actual ratings--time period downgrades first and foremost-- and there was no discernable ratings erosion that immediately resulted from them.  As for ratings growth--in daytime in particular, there's rarely been a cause-and-effect that a bigger budget caused a ratings increase.  Even in the case of ABC PYRAMID the show was improving once it moved to 2 PM before the jackpot was doubled.

Sure, tournaments with large payoffs occasionally spiked numbers--the JOKER's run between 77 and 80 where each ensuing tournament's grand prize was improved upon are perhaps the best example--but the belief that the bigger the payoff the bigger the audience is essentially a myth, and Lord knows I spent far too much time analyzing ratings patterns to prove that point to superiors who felt strongly about keeping budgets in line to overrule otherwise eager producers who still believed the myth,

SamJ93

  • Member
  • Posts: 880
Re: Lower Budget, Higher Ratings
« Reply #19 on: May 05, 2025, 01:38:47 PM »
Would J! count when they eliminated co-champions in the event of a tie? I doubt very few (if any) fans stopped watching because of it, and it was a pretty obscure rule (and very much an anomaly for a game show) until Arthur Chu began exploiting it.
"Pier 1 Imports...where they got the greatest junk in the world." --Stefan Hatos

TimK2003

  • Member
  • Posts: 4570
Re: Lower Budget, Higher Ratings
« Reply #20 on: May 05, 2025, 04:24:23 PM »
If my fuzzy memory was right, when Tom Kennedy's Name That Tune first started (in the Kathie Lee Johnson years) if a player won their match AND the Golden Medley, they got an individual shot in the isolation booth the following show for $100,000.

Then when they went to the disco set, any player who won the match AND Golden Medley only got to play in additional Tournament of Champions elimination matches weeks later  for a shot at the big prize.  They never got to play against the house for the $100,000 like they did in the Kathie Lee years.

I want to say there were more years (and ratings) during the disco era than the first Kennedy version.

Was that correct?

Jeremy Nelson

  • Member
  • Posts: 2988
Re: Lower Budget, Higher Ratings
« Reply #21 on: May 05, 2025, 06:04:15 PM »
If my fuzzy memory was right, when Tom Kennedy's Name That Tune first started (in the Kathie Lee Johnson years) if a player won their match AND the Golden Medley, they got an individual shot in the isolation booth the following show for $100,000.

Then when they went to the disco set, any player who won the match AND Golden Medley only got to play in additional Tournament of Champions elimination matches weeks later  for a shot at the big prize.  They never got to play against the house for the $100,000 like they did in the Kathie Lee years.

I want to say there were more years (and ratings) during the disco era than the first Kennedy version.

Was that correct?
I think it was 4 for the OG and 3 for the disco.

I don't know if the show actually got cheaper- they were giving away a guaranteed $100,000 every nine weeks and cars in Melody Roulette- a prize previously reserved for Golden Medley winners. Shoot, I know I'd seen losing contestants walk away with $5k+ on numerous occasions. I'm not familiar with the ballpark win rate on the original Kennedy version, but it would surprise me if they were giving away $100k in 1975 once a month.
Fun Fact To Make You Feel Old: Syndicated Jeopeardy has allowed champs to play until they lose longer than they've retired them after five days.

wdm1219inpenna

  • Member
  • Posts: 269
Re: Lower Budget, Higher Ratings
« Reply #22 on: Today at 06:34:15 AM »
1984 Scrabble started with 10 time champions being able to win over $50,000 but then later on they capped it to a flat $20,000 after a 5th Sprint win and $40,000 after the 10th and final Sprint win.

Also when they went to the self-contained episodes, the Scrabble Sprint round went from $1,500 to $1,000, perhaps to balance the fact that a minimum of $5,000 was up for grabs at the end of every episode due to the Bonus Sprint.

Scrabble lasted about 6 years so I dare say when they went to the self contained format it didn't seem to adversely affect anything ratings wise.  The only thing that did Scrabble in was the changing of the times with fewer and fewer traditional housewives being home to watch game shows, soaps, etc. as more and more entered the working world.

TLEberle

  • Member
  • Posts: 16155
  • Rules Constable
Re: Lower Budget, Higher Ratings
« Reply #23 on: Today at 10:33:26 AM »
I'm not sure that the reduction in budget was a one-to-one to increasing the ratings. The show was getting better in terms of game flow, players understanding the rules and the procedures. I might argue that the move to the daily bracket format was a budget increase in terms of giving away more than a grand here or there with the bonus squares and the sprint jackpot.

Didn't seem to adversely affect isn't the same as reducing the prize fund and seeing a ratings increase.
/there are non-traditional housewives too, yes?
If you didn’t create it, it isn’t your content.