American Ratings Discussion

FreudianSlippers

Mr E wrote: »

Good article from Metacritic, compiling a list of shows and aggregating thoughts from various sites on whether they are going to be cancelled.

Pretty predictable fare, but they think that Elementary, Scream Queens, Sleepy Hollow, APB, Blacklist Redemption, American Crime, Criminal Minds Beyond Borders, Emerald City, Making History, No Tomorrow, Powerless, Quantico, Ransom, Secrets and Lies, and Time after Time are all toast.

The Catch, Blindspot, Code Black, Agents of Shield and Timeless are all in serious trouble too.

http://www.metacritic.com/pictures/renew-cancel-predictions-for-2017-bubble-shows

IMO the following are probably not as dire as the others:

American Crime
Making History
Agents of SHIELD
Timeless

The rest are deservedly toast, with the exception of Powerless which is an absolute toss up, but I'd bet on cancellation.

Frank O. Pinion

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Mr E wrote: »

Good article from Metacritic, compiling a list of shows and aggregating thoughts from various sites on whether they are going to be cancelled.

Pretty predictable fare, but they think that Elementary, Scream Queens, Sleepy Hollow, APB, Blacklist Redemption, American Crime, Criminal Minds Beyond Borders, Emerald City, Making History, No Tomorrow, Powerless, Quantico, Ransom, Secrets and Lies, and Time after Time are all toast.

The Catch, Blindspot, Code Black, Agents of Shield and Timeless are all in serious trouble too.

http://www.metacritic.com/pictures/renew-cancel-predictions-for-2017-bubble-shows

IMO the following are probably not as dire as the others:

American Crime
Making History
Agents of SHIELD
Timeless

The rest are deservedly toast, with the exception of Powerless which is an absolute toss up, but I'd bet on cancellation.

Making History and Timeless are just as dire. Powerless a toss-up? Its recent episodes were replaced with Trial & Error repeats.

FreudianSlippers

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

Making History and Timeless are just as dire. Powerless a toss-up? Its recent episodes were replaced with Trial & Error repeats.

Sorry, but I don't know on what you're basing these opinions.

Making History has only been on 3 weeks, the network likes it and it's not doing that badly in overall +3 ratings. Is it in a competitive Sunday night slot? Yes. Is it too early to be ringing its death bell? Yes also. It helps that the network also likes the show, so I'd be at least giving it a few more weeks before calling it dire.

Timeless didn't have awful ratings at all and when you look at the full NBC stable of shows, I'm not sure they can axe it... You have all the procedurals (like 4 (?!) Chicago shows and Law & Order) and you have a bunch that are almost certain for the axe (Blacklist: Redemption, Trial & Error, Blindspot) and Grimm and Emerald City wrapping up final seasons, Timeless is the obvious choice for another season on a different day.

Powerless has had a bump in the +3 ratings for the most recent episode and NBC has commented that they know this show is more likely to do well online than broadcast. IMO bumping Powerless for Trial & Error says a hell of a lot more about the dire nature of T&E than Powerless - it means the network is desperate to get people to watch T&E and are confident enough with Powerless to push it back.

Frank O. Pinion

I'm basing my opinions on the 18-49 rating, and from observing American TV ratings for numerous years. +3 ratings hardly matter, despite what networks claim. It's all about the live 18-49 rating. Claiming bumping new episodes of Powerless for repeats of other shows, is somehow a good thing for Powerless, is madness.

FreudianSlippers

1) Broadcast networks don't care too much about live figures any more. There was an entire discussion about this after the upfronts last year; NBC itself admitted the days of a 4.0 and 20m live viewers is dead and buried. However, the big-4 networks put more stock into +3 (and to a lesser extent +7) than they did even 5 or so years ago. CBS/CW for example can't actually assess ratings from their Netflix content deals, so +3 / +7 gives them at least an idea of where they are - people just aren't really watching live TV any more. NBC, in the case of Powerless, has specifically said that they're more interested in digital performance of the show.

Let's be clear, I'm not saying that this show is certain for renewal or is definitely not being cancelled. I'm saying that your points regarding a same-week repeat of T&E bumping Powerless is more damning of T&E than it is of Powerless.

2) It's simple logic in the case of Timeless, that it's the strongest of their ****ty stable and is not a huge budget show. Unless NBC really wants to keep Blindspot for some reason, or they are just fine with being comedy and Chicago [insert profession here] then Timeless feels from a business standpoint as the logical choice for a second season.



I'm in NY for upfronts in May before going back to LA and if I'm wrong, I'm wrong... I'm just saying that IMO looking at the numbers as well as the potential fate of the other shows on the networks, these 3 shows stand out to me as the potential surprise renewals depending on how things go over the next few weeks.

Frank O. Pinion

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

1) Broadcast networks don't care too much about live figures any more. There was an entire discussion about this after the upfronts last year; NBC itself admitted the days of a 4.0 and 20m live viewers is dead and buried. However, the big-4 networks put more stock into +3 (and to a lesser extent +7) than they did even 5 or so years ago. CBS/CW for example can't actually assess ratings from their Netflix content deals, so +3 / +7 gives them at least an idea of where they are - people just aren't really watching live TV any more. NBC, in the case of Powerless, has specifically said that they're more interested in digital performance of the show.

This is total network spin, and is known as such. "Broadcast networks don't care too much about live figures", come on, live figures are STILL #1 priority, don't be fooled by networks heads saying otherwise. Yeah, they care more about +3/+7 ratings than before, but if a show has truly terrible live ratings, it doesn't matter how many people watch the show later on their DVRs. In some instances, awards can help certain low-rated shows, but not always.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Let's be clear, I'm not saying that this show is certain for renewal or is definitely not being cancelled. I'm saying that your points regarding a same-week repeat of T&E bumping Powerless is more damning of T&E than it is of Powerless.

How is NBC wanting more people to catch Trial & Error, a bad thing for the show?

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

2) It's simple logic in the case of Timeless, that it's the strongest of their ****ty stable and is not a huge budget show. Unless NBC really wants to keep Blindspot for some reason, or they are just fine with being comedy and Chicago [insert profession here] then Timeless feels from a business standpoint as the logical choice for a second season.

Timeless' ratings for a first season show with only 16 episodes were not great. It has a higher chance of getting renewed than the other NBC bubble shows, but with a long way to syndication, with ratings dropping each season, I don't think it will or should get renewed. Of course I might be wrong, and with the way network TV has been the past season or so, I would not be shocked to see it get renewed, I just don't see the long term value in it.

FreudianSlippers

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

This is total network spin, and is known as such. "Broadcast networks don't care too much about live figures", come on, live figures are STILL #1 priority, don't be fooled by networks heads saying otherwise. Yeah, they care more about +3/+7 ratings than before, but if a show has truly terrible live ratings, it doesn't matter how many people watch the show later on their DVRs. In some instances, awards can help certain low-rated shows, but not always.

Around 60% of broadcast network advertising is sold on the +7 metric; it's higher still if you discount live/late-night/news. Cable is significantly higher than this (but usually sold on the +3 metric).

Viewership is still important to networks as a whole, but less important for individual shows. I think only NBCU and ABC still even report same-day figures IIRC.

How is NBC wanting more people to catch Trial & Error, a bad thing for the show?

They lost over 50% viewership from The Voice and in the past, NBC has pulled moves like this when they intend to burn off a show quickly - testing it on Thursday with a repeat may also mean they feel Powerless might do better on Tuesdays?

Timeless' ratings for a first season show with only 16 episodes were not great. It has a higher chance of getting renewed than the other NBC bubble shows

That's exactly what I'm saying.

but with a long way to syndication

Syndication wasn't even something I was considering on this show... I was merely saying that I don't think they will make a decision until unfronts with the likelihood being that they
keep this for another season to see if it can do better with some other shows.
The whole network took a hit this year on scripted IMO.

Of course I might be wrong, and with the way network TV has been the past season or so, I would not be shocked to see it get renewed, I just don't see the long term value in it.

It has transitional value potentially into next season. It also has potential to slot in more comfortably in the Summer.

It's not a great show - I'm not defending it from some fanboy position, but I understand the logic in keeping it for another season given the likely fate of its brothers and sisters on the network.

Frank O. Pinion

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I think only NBCU and ABC still even report same-day figures IIRC.

To some degree, that's because they are the two broadcast networks that really care about the 18-49 rating. For FOX and CW, it's the 18-34 rating, and for CBS, it's the 25-54 rating, because of their generally older audience.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Syndication wasn't even something I was considering on this show...

It is something networks heads consider, though. Syndication money.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

It also has potential to slot in more comfortably in the Summer.

I'm not saying it never happens, but moving a September-May season show to Summer, is not the norm. It'll also make even less money in the Summer.

I won't touch on your other points, as I agree with them, in general.

Also Starring LeVar Burton wrote: »

Any chance ya's could take the ratings slap fight elsewhere lads? I'd imagine the vast majority around here could not give a **** about Powerless, Trial & Error and whatever other shows you're on about... Not since the days of Richard Dower* have ratings talk caused such controversy...

I was waiting for the "Nobody cares (or understands) American TV ratings, SO SHUT UP!"-post.

Mr E

Posts split from the Renewals thread. This is an interesting discussion, so lets keep it going.

FreudianSlippers

Two points generally:

1) I didn't think it was a "slap fight" at all, just a level conversation about ratings... which leads me to;
2) (and this is absolutely not a questioning of mod decision to split this discussion into a new thread) The way certain networks (broadcast vs. cable as well as within the big-4 + CW) view and report ratings is intrinsic to any discussion about renewal/cancellation of shows.

Frank O. Pinion

Yes, while I like being able to freely talk about ratings, am I not supposed to bring up the ratings of shows when talking about their renew/cancellation chances in the other thread?

Mr E

Your debate was derailing the thread. There were a few reported posts about it.

Frank O. Pinion

I understand that... but I don't understand how we can seriously talk about a show's renewal/cancellation chances (in a thread about renewals and cancellations), without talking about their ratings, 18-49 demo, etc.

FreudianSlippers

Mr E wrote: »

Your debate was derailing the thread. There were a few reported posts about it.

I totally understand how the debate about weight of Live, L+3, L+7 is slightly outside of that topic and deserves its own thread; but just echoing Frank's clarification as to whether we aren't supposed to discuss ratings at all in the renew/cancel thread?

Mr E

People read that thread to see what's renewed or cancelled, not to read a long back-and-forth discussion about the importance of ratings.

Frank O. Pinion

Well, over six weeks later, and I was right about Timeless, Making History, and Powerless being cancelled. Which I thought were extremely obvious cancellations.

FreudianSlippers

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

Well, over six weeks later, and I was right about Timeless, Making History, and Powerless being cancelled. Which I thought were extremely obvious cancellations.

Based on what? Ownership and cost or the current pick-ups for next year?

There is a lot of surprise amongst people I've spoken to, including some people at Sony TV.

ixoy

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

There is a lot of surprise amongst people I've spoken to, including some people at Sony TV.

You've spoken to people at Sony Tv? Are you in the industry?

FreudianSlippers

ixoy wrote: »

You've spoken to people at Sony Tv? Are you in the industry?

Yes, I do finance work for (mainly) television in LA, so I'm there 3/4 of the year. We work with producers and distributors to deal with the equity and sales or commissioning which actually pays for the show's budget.

Frank O. Pinion

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Based on what? Ownership and cost or the current pick-ups for next year?

There is a lot of surprise amongst people I've spoken to, including some people at Sony TV.

Mainly still the 18-49 live rating demo, and getting to syndication. I do not care about Network spin, saying it doesn't matter, DVR numbers, etc.

In the case of Timeless, getting 3 extra episodes ordered and not the back 9 in November, was a terrible sign. If it stayed around 1.0, I could see it getting renewed (maybe), but the 0.6 and 0.7 in February sealed its fate. I could not see this lasting to 88 episodes, (at least season 5, with less than 22 episodes its first season), so why bother?

Making History got cut from 13 episodes to 9 before it even premiered. Another a bad sign. No way was this getting to syndication with only 9 episodes in its first season, and viewer totals under 2 million.

Like I said earlier in this thread, NBC were pulling new episodes of Powerless, for repeats of Trial & Error (clearly a horrible sign), then pulled the show completely with 3 episodes left to air. I knew all 3 of these shows would be cancelled, but Powerless was the most obvious.

FreudianSlippers

So what do you make of Fox burning 2 episodes of Brooklyn Nine-Nine at the moment?

Making History I agree was a longshot but depended on up-fronts really.

Picking Blindspot over Timeless has no clear answer based on your ratings-only metric.

I'm not saying ratings don't matter, but I think it's incorrect to base decisions on these entirely - clearly a lot of the decisions this year were not ratings based.

All in all, I was a lot more right than wrong in a very strange year for decisions... a year that is clearly not ratings based no matter how you swing it.

Agent Coulson

Ratings aren't always an indicator as shown by Timeless get uncancelled.

AoS ratings also went up by 120% when DVR views were taking into account.


Networks are slowly coming to the understanding that there old model doesn't work as well in this day and age.

martingriff

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Ratings aren't always an indicator as shown by Timeless get uncancelled.

AoS ratings also went up by 120% when DVR views were taking into account.


Networks are slowly coming to the understanding that there old model doesn't work as well in this day and age.

Was just about to write something like this with timeless been uncancelled. Looks like the rating of shows need to be examined given the many way people now look at shows

Frank O. Pinion

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

So what do you make of Fox burning 2 episodes of Brooklyn Nine-Nine at the moment?

What's there to make of it? Brooklyn secured a great syndication deal in its third season, that pretty much guaranteed not only a fourth season, but a fifth as well. FOX had a weird schedule this season, with long gaps for some shows, including Brooklyn. They're just getting all this season's episodes aired before the end of May, and doubling up to do so. Has happened to many sitcoms in the past.

FreudianSlippers wrote:

Picking Blindspot over Timeless has no clear answer based on your ratings-only metric.

Not ratings-only, I also hugely factor in syndication. Ultimately, they picked both of these shows. But the choice of Blindspot over Timeless was easy. 45 episodes vs only 16 episodes. Also, Blindspot didn't go fractional (under a 1.0 18-49 rating), until its 35th episode. Timeless went fractional by its 11th episode.

FreudianSlippers wrote:

I'm not saying ratings don't matter, but I think it's incorrect to base decisions on these entirely - clearly a lot of the decisions this year were not ratings based.

Live 18-49 rating, syndication money, and ownership matter. Other stuff, sometimes matter...but a lot, lot less.

FreudianSlippers wrote:

All in all, I was a lot more right than wrong in a very strange year for decisions... a year that is clearly not ratings based no matter how you swing it.

Every year is based on ratings. Ad revenue from airing the shows is how networks make their money in the first place. The threshold for a "bad rating" just gets lower each year. Nothing new.

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Ratings aren't always an indicator as shown by Timeless get uncancelled.

Very odd and rare situation with Timeless. But if it airs Summer 2018, then it got cancelled as a regular September-May broadcast season show.

Agent Coulson wrote:

AoS ratings also went up by 120% when DVR views were taking into account.

Does not matter. Corporate synergy of ABC, Disney, and Marvel got AoS renewed, and get it to 100 episodes.

Agent Coulson wrote:

Networks are slowly coming to the understanding that there old model doesn't work as well in this day and age.

Nonsense. Networks are fully aware ratings go down each year, as they have for decades, and are fully aware of the effects Netflix, DVRs, binge-watching, etc. have on their business. They are just trying to slow the process, and continue to try to get live viewers, like they always have.

People must understand networks are a business. They're only making and airing shows to air advertisements. To make MONEY. Not to entertain you. They only air segments of sitcoms and dramas between commercials, to give Americans a break from all the products they want them to buy.

Frank O. Pinion

A recent Q&A from a former American Network TV scheduler's blog that I read...

Question: "Do advertisers really care about L+7 or 3 or whatever math networks are using to goose their numbers? Maybe I'm odd, but when I'm watching a recorded show, never do I sit through the commercials. If I'm an advertiser, delayed playback wouldn't matter."

Answer: L+3 and L+7 ratings are used by the networks to evaluate shows and for PR purposes. When these metrics first appeared on the scene, the cry among executives was, "Wait for the Live plus 3s before you come to a conclusion regarding a show." It is now simply accepted that ALL shows add viewers with delayed viewing, but as I have said, the rich get richer and the poor get a little less poor. The big shows get the most delayed viewing, and the smaller shows may have bigger percentage increases for their audience, but they are still the smaller shows. Media buyers care about the C3 and C7 ratings, which are the average minute ratings for the NETWORK commercials within a show. If you fast forward through the commercial, you will not be counted. If you stop to watch a commercial (people do), you will be counted. If my memory serves me, the L+SD ratings are fairly close to the C3 ratings.