Do they mean 16m overnights or officials? For the main show? The results show? An average of both? Last year it had 14.98m for the main show and 17.32m for the results in the overnights rising to 16.36m main show and 18.29m results in the officials. I think ITV are underplaying their expectations. The results show should easily crack their target. The main show might drop a little bit under if it clashes with Dr Who.
Although it isn't stated specifically the person says 16m+ is what advertisers have been paying out for. I presume 16m is for the results show with a bit less for the main show - although don't forget they were on scorchers of a day.
Why? Just because it clashes with EastEnders, its perceived as 'bad'.
And I think the semi's will have 12m or 13m. If you think they'll have 17m, then you might as well go to another parallel universe.
Pretty much an error on their half seeing as today's isn't on.
I was on about the final being 17m.
No because i actually want to watch something rather then Simon cowell and his talentless judges hosting a show full of mostly talentless people.
Come on 2hours or so 5 days a week is over the top
even some of the hardcore BGT viewers will get bored
No and im going to avoid it as much as possible but it would have been nice for ITV to come up with some other shows aswell rather then filling the 7:30pm-10:00pm slot of the same 2 shows all week
3) ITV need to come into the real world. They axed Married Single Other because it didn't do as well in the ratings as they expected. Really? It did as well as I expected it to do. Viewers do not warm to the cliched characters that inhabit these cliched "comedy-dramas" <snort>, experiencing the same cliched relationship problems experienced by the cliched characters in the previous Cold Feet rip-off. This is why ITV are in the mess they're in - they've lost the ability to relate to their viewers.
Plus the first series of Cold Feet didn't do brilliantly in the ratings either. 7-8 million. Sounds great today but in 1998 on ITV on a Sunday night in November against the latest BBC worthy costume drama (Vanity Fair) - pretty mediocre - the equivalent of what today? Let me see... 4.5 million? It had pretty much half the audience that Heartbeat had in the hour before - over 14 million.
They axed MSO because its ratings were below what that they were expecting. Fair enough, if ITV still think 4 million is not good enough for a 9pm drama then I admire that. However, earlier in the year ITV failed to get over 4m for a month barring sport or The Bill I believe. I have to question whether a channel that struggles to 4m in what should have been a higher rating period can afford to throw away a show such as MSO with its ratings. I appreicate that MSO probably costs a lot more than the usual cheap reality filler that ITV could have shown but they need to take risks on dramas like MSO to improve its very low repuation at the moment.
And now they're complaining that The Whole 19 Yards is not doing as well as they wanted. They expected this to do bettter? Why? It's wallpaper television. Fine to watch if you've nothing better to do, but nobody's going to go out of their way to watch it. ITV don't seem to have twigged there's more than 4 channels to watch now.
And Vernon Kay's not as "big" as he once was? When was this? No disrespect - I like the guy, but he's just a TV presenter. Any TV show he hosts flops or succeeds because of the format, not because of Vernon.
I have to agree, the presenter of most shows has very little impact on my decision to watch that show. Sometimes, depending on the format the host may feature a lot so I can see why a presenter may be off putting but a show like TW19Y, surely it mustn't matter? ITV have made a reasonable deal to promote that Adrian Chiles is debuting on the coverage tonight. But, is he going to being in any people who wouldnt have watched otherwise? I wouldnt have thought so. Even Ant and Dec couldnt make their new shows much of a success.
No and im going to avoid it as much as possible but it would have been nice for ITV to come up with some other shows aswell rather then filling the 7:30pm-10:00pm slot of the same 2 shows all week
Most weeks they do differ (well, post 9pm they do anyway). This is one week where they've decided to maximise their audience. There's enough channels to choose from if you're not a fan of Britain's Got Talent or the soaps...indeed the number of channels available may have indirectly led ITV1 down this somewhat desperate route.
Most weeks they do differ (well, post 9pm they do anyway). This is one week where they've decided to maximise their audience. There's enough channels to choose from if you're not a fan of Britain's Got Talent or the soaps...indeed the number of channels available may have indirectly led ITV1 down this somewhat desperate route.
Wonder what ITV would do without the Xfactor and BGT?
At some point people will get bored Just take a look at Big Brother everyone was talking about it and it rated well but not anymore
Well a decent enough game of footie for ITV1 this evening in terms of goals. But if that was supposed to inspire confidence in England going into the World Cup then it kind of failed.
Million Pound Drop is on. Not really feeling it so far. For a programme that is supposedly live, it feels a bit flat. I get that they might be trying to create a bit of tension in the studio and that's why the audience is so quiet, but that doesn't really work when you've got Davina who is quite lively presenting and two rather excitable contestants.
No and im going to avoid it as much as possible but it would have been nice for ITV to come up with some other shows aswell rather then filling the 7:30pm-10:00pm slot of the same 2 shows all week
Good for you. Personally I avoid EastEnders every week. In fact I think it should be axed or at least reduced to one episode per month, it's awful television, BBC1 should be forced to show something else at that time, rather than show this high rating popular programme. The entire schedule should be based on my own personal tastes... etc etc.
Slamming a channel for poor ratings is one thing, slamming them for showing high rating popular programmes, in the ratings thread of all places, is another.
Good for you. Personally I avoid EastEnders every week. In fact I think it should be axed or at least reduced to one episode per month, it's awful television, BBC1 should be forced to show something else at that time, rather than show this high rating popular programme. The entire schedule should be based on my own personal tastes... etc etc.
Slamming a channel for poor ratings is one thing, slamming them for showing high rating popular programmes, in the ratings thread of all places, is another.
Can't see Million Pound Drop doing well at all - I switched off after the first 15 minutes. It just feels like one of those single series lottery shows. The production values are dreadful as well - poor camera angles and Davina having to spend most of her time telling the contestants to move the money about. It's also severely lacking in tension. I can't see this saving Channel 4 post-BB.
Good for you. Personally I avoid EastEnders every week. In fact I think it should be axed or at least reduced to one episode per month, it's awful television, BBC1 should be forced to show something else at that time, rather than show this high rating popular programme. The entire schedule should be based on my own personal tastes... etc etc.
Slamming a channel for poor ratings is one thing, slamming them for showing high rating popular programmes, in the ratings thread of all places, is another.
So if the BBC shown EastEnders at 7:30pm followed by SCD till 10:00pm every night people wouldn't moan?
Wonder what ITV would do without the Xfactor and BGT?
At some point people will get bored Just take a look at Big Brother everyone was talking about it and it rated well but not anymore
Because they are popular and rate high so no one could slam the BBC if they decided to do something like this
fill an evening with soapy drama:D
There would be uproar in the RATINGS thread:)
This is going to open a can of worms, but never mind. We haven't had this discussion on here for a couple of weeks anyway. The BBC and the commercial channels have a different approach because of the way they are funded. The BBC are a more rounded organisation because they can afford to be. The commercial channels, in comparison, cannot so do not have the variation.
Comments
*crosses fingers*
Although it isn't stated specifically the person says 16m+ is what advertisers have been paying out for. I presume 16m is for the results show with a bit less for the main show - although don't forget they were on scorchers of a day.
No because i actually want to watch something rather then Simon cowell and his talentless judges hosting a show full of mostly talentless people.
Come on 2hours or so 5 days a week is over the top
even some of the hardcore BGT viewers will get bored
No one's forcing you to watch, are they?
I have to agree, the presenter of most shows has very little impact on my decision to watch that show. Sometimes, depending on the format the host may feature a lot so I can see why a presenter may be off putting but a show like TW19Y, surely it mustn't matter? ITV have made a reasonable deal to promote that Adrian Chiles is debuting on the coverage tonight. But, is he going to being in any people who wouldnt have watched otherwise? I wouldnt have thought so. Even Ant and Dec couldnt make their new shows much of a success.
Most weeks they do differ (well, post 9pm they do anyway). This is one week where they've decided to maximise their audience. There's enough channels to choose from if you're not a fan of Britain's Got Talent or the soaps...indeed the number of channels available may have indirectly led ITV1 down this somewhat desperate route.
Not that difficult. It's one channel out of hundreds.
Surely alot of Kids watch BGT and won't they be in bed ready for school?
And Corrie's older viewers will likely be in bed ready to get up early in the morning to be waiting outisde the shops at 8:00am:D
At some point people will get bored Just take a look at Big Brother everyone was talking about it and it rated well but not anymore
Not like you to generalise...
Corrie's been on at 10pm before and it did fine.
I do remember Corrie airing at 10:00pm though and credit where credits due it was a good episode and the explotion was good
Err, yes there was back in 2004/2005 when they were aired.
Million Pound Drop is on. Not really feeling it so far. For a programme that is supposedly live, it feels a bit flat. I get that they might be trying to create a bit of tension in the studio and that's why the audience is so quiet, but that doesn't really work when you've got Davina who is quite lively presenting and two rather excitable contestants.
Good for you. Personally I avoid EastEnders every week. In fact I think it should be axed or at least reduced to one episode per month, it's awful television, BBC1 should be forced to show something else at that time, rather than show this high rating popular programme. The entire schedule should be based on my own personal tastes... etc etc.
Slamming a channel for poor ratings is one thing, slamming them for showing high rating popular programmes, in the ratings thread of all places, is another.
or better still
7:30pm EastEnders,8:00pm Doctors,8:30pm Casualty,9:10pm Holby
Because they are popular and rate high so no one could slam the BBC if they decided to do something like this
fill an evening with soapy drama:D
There would be uproar in the RATINGS thread:)
Claim bankruptcy probably.
This is going to open a can of worms, but never mind. We haven't had this discussion on here for a couple of weeks anyway.