• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

2014-15 TV Cancellations: Under the Dome canned, what will CBS do with CG cows next?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Penguin

Member
Spin-off of Breaking Bad
Very positive reviews
Sandwiched in between The Walking Dead mid season premiere and The Talking Dead

Yes, it's going to premiere very very well. I'm guessing somewhere in the 4.0-5.0 range.

Off by a bit....
#BetterCallSaul debuts with what AMC calls the biggest A18-49 numbers for any basic cable series premiere: 4.4M A18-49 viewers (3.5 rating)

Which he later marked to an actual 3.4

https://twitter.com/TVMoJoe/status/564879487565701120
 

RatskyWatsky

Hunky Nostradamus
Off by a bit....


Which he later marked to an actual 3.4

https://twitter.com/TVMoJoe/status/564879487565701120

6.9 million viewers and a 3.4 A18-49: the highest rated cable series premiere ever, but I thought it'd do better coming off of The Walking Dead. The season premiere of The Talking Dead did just under that in total viewers but .1 better in the demo. (although it did have a stronger lead in, of which TTD is entirely dependent, so it's not an exact 1-to-1 comparison)

Still, the real test will be how much of that number they retain tonight and in the following Mondays, especially since AMC never programs on that day and it'll take some getting used to for a lot of people.

I mean, not that the show is in danger - by any means - highest cable series premiere ever, fantastic reviews, already renewed and I'm sure if they want to do more seasons beyond that AMC will be more than happy to oblige, so you know, this is just for fun.
 

RatskyWatsky

Hunky Nostradamus

HBO not prematurely cancelling one of their best shows?

BzDmsB7.gif
 

beat

Member
Awesome. Glad to see Nahnatchka Khan's show doing well. Hopefully it stays around longer than her last show. (Don't trust the B----) Another great show gone before its time.
A bunch of the jokes feel a lot like Apt 23's style of humor too. Definitely give the show a try if you haven't but did like Don't Trust The B in Apt 23.
 

Schlep

Member
To put these blockbuster ratings in context, Season 9 of the X-files, without Moulder, premiered with a 6.5 rating and 10.6 million viewers

That season ended (and was cancelled) with a 7.5 rating and 13 million viewers.

Link that Penguin posted had 15.1m live+7d and doesn't include Hulu or FoxNow.
 

ivysaur12

Banned
To put these blockbuster ratings in context, Season 9 of the X-files, without Moulder, premiered with a 6.5 rating and 10.6 million viewers

That season ended (and was cancelled) with a 7.5 rating and 13 million viewers.

There's no real use comparing numbers to a time before there went literally hundreds of channels and options for a viewer.
 
There's no real use comparing numbers to a time before there went literally hundreds of channels and options for a viewer.

There were literally hundreds of channels in 2002. Even channels like G4 and TechTV that no longer exist.

And Netflix has been pumping out DVDs by mail since 1999.

2002 was awhile ago, and there was no Hulu, but lets not pretend we're talking about 1981.
 

Penguin

Member
There were literally hundreds of channels in 2002. Even channels like G4 and TechTV that no longer exist.

And Netflix has been pumping out DVDs by mail since 1999.

2002 was awhile ago, and there was no Hulu, but lets not pretend we're talking about 1981.

I think it was Stump who posted an article a few weeks ago that there are dozens of more shows on TV now.

So attention is divided beyond simple number of channels, but also things you can watch, where and when.
 
I think it was Stump who posted an article a few weeks ago that there are dozens of more shows on TV now.

So attention is divided beyond simple number of channels, but also things you can watch, where and when.

I think that was more scripted drama? And that may be true, but there certainly arent hundreds more channels.
 

beat

Member
There were literally hundreds of channels in 2002. Even channels like G4 and TechTV that no longer exist.

And Netflix has been pumping out DVDs by mail since 1999.

2002 was awhile ago, and there was no Hulu, but lets not pretend we're talking about 1981.

The ratings _all around_ have been splintering into more and more shards. With a couple of juggernaut exceptions, almost everything is way down, even hits, even if total viewing time hasn't decreased.
 
There were literally hundreds of channels in 2002. Even channels like G4 and TechTV that no longer exist.

And Netflix has been pumping out DVDs by mail since 1999.

2002 was awhile ago, and there was no Hulu, but lets not pretend we're talking about 1981.

But average ratings have fallen so far since then that Ivy is exactly right. Any comparison is useless.

I know people hate TVBTN but they are exactly right with their Gunsmoke rule: No comparing the ratings of any individual show this season to a show in any season except the previous one.
 

ivysaur12

Banned
But average ratings have fallen so far since then that Ivy is exactly right. Any comparison is useless.

I know people hate TVBTN but they are exactly right with their Gunsmoke rule: No comparing the ratings of any individual show this season to a show in any season except the previous one.

I wasn't going to name said rule, but what I was trying to do was talking about it in theory.

You can't compare 2002 to 2015. It just doesn't work that way. The comparison is utterly useless because you're talking about two completely different worlds.
 

RatskyWatsky

Hunky Nostradamus
Empire's performance has just been insane. Fox is breathing a huge sigh of relief after everything else shit the bed this season. (besides Gotham)
 

Wait what why

But average ratings have fallen so far since then that Ivy is exactly right. Any comparison is useless.

I know people hate TVBTN but they are exactly right with their Gunsmoke rule: No comparing the ratings of any individual show this season to a show in any season except the previous one.

Ratings for events have increased. Your superbowls and awards ceremonies and the like.

That means people are as willing as ever to sit in front of the tube at a set time of the day to watch.

Problem is, networks arent captivating people any more. Thats an issue. Hell, look at the walking dead. If thatw as on Fox it would be getting 2x the ratings and fit right into the numbers we say 15 years ago.

Now, I fully agree there have been some changes. That is, comparing a rating from 2002 vs a rating today +7 makes sense because time shifting HAS been a huge difference. But if your time shifted rating is half what a mediocre series did in 2002, the problem is the content.
 
Has anyone been following the Late Late show ratings?

From 12:35-1:35 a.m. ET, "Late Night with Seth Meyers" (1.4/5 in metered-market households) beat CBS's "Late Late Show" (1.2/4).

I find it interesting that without a real host, with no real set, and sometimes with no audience, the show is still competitive. Is it really a case of people falling asleep with the TVs on?
 

ivysaur12

Banned
Wait what why



Ratings for events have increased. Your superbowls and awards ceremonies and the like.

That means people are as willing as ever to sit in front of the tube at a set time of the day to watch.

Problem is, networks arent captivating people any more. Thats an issue. Hell, look at the walking dead. If thatw as on Fox it would be getting 2x the ratings and fit right into the numbers we say 15 years ago.

Now, I fully agree there have been some changes. That is, comparing a rating from 2002 vs a rating today +7 makes sense because time shifting HAS been a huge difference. But if your time shifted rating is half what a mediocre series did in 2002, the problem is the content.

No, this is all absolutely incorrect.

It's not about content. That's not to say that content doesn't play a part of it, but it's not the motivating factor. If you launched any single show from 2002 in 2015, its ratings would be significantly lower than its 2002 ratings. Why? Not only is it harder to launch a show in 2015 because of increased competition, ratings of shows EVERYWHERE have lagged. The Walking Dead is a phenomena that won't be replicated because it hit the zeitgeist at the right time. Chasing Walking Dead ratings is a fool's errand, because it won't happen for a long time.

Ratings for the Super Bowl have increased because the Super Bowl is not really a real television program -- it's a cultural event. And duh the Super Bowl ratings have increased -- the entire population of the United States has increased. When the Super Bowl is on, America watches the Super Bowl. You can't compare the Super Bowl to a regular television program, because a regular television program is not a cultural event that is as ingrained in society as one could make it.

It's just not the same as it was in 2002. You have to compete against more cable channels, literally over 1000% more cable originals, DVRs/streaming/on demand. Again: It's not comparable.
 

Opiate

Member
I have just read this: "Melissa and Joey cancelled: the end of an era." I've felt this for some time, but this finally moved me to post it: I feel "end of an era" is bandied about, far, far too lightly.

My local Del Taco goes out of business: end of an era.

7/11 stops selling reheated hot dogs; end of an era.

Target replaces Cutco cutlery with off brand counterparts; end of an era.

A massive meteor strikes the earth signaling the end of most species of life and beginning the Paleozoic period; end of an era.

Which of these best fits to you?
 

tim.mbp

Member
I have just read this: "Melissa and Joey cancelled: the end of an era." I've felt this for some time, but this finally moved me to post it: I feel "end of an era" is bandied about, far, far too lightly.

My local Del Taco goes out of business: end of an era.

7/11 stops selling reheated hot dogs; end of an era.

Target replaces Cutco cutlery with off brand counterparts; end of an era.

A massive meteor strikes the earth signaling the end of most species of life and beginning the Paleozoic period; end of an era.

Which of these best fits to you?

Do you have a problem with all colloquialism?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom