Options

The Ratings Thread (Part 34)

14445474950125

Comments

  • Options
    happy tvhappy tv Posts: 1,708
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ronant wrote: »
    Well just had a look on iplayer and The Voice ran for 1h 34m 29s. But better to squeeze it in now then drag the battle rounds out for weeks on end.

    I think tomorrow it will have a bigger audience just because it's Sunday. High 10's tonight and maybe in the 11's tomorrow.

    It will be lower tomorrow night
  • Options
    happy tvhappy tv Posts: 1,708
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Andy23 wrote: »
    What is the point of all this talk on Saturday nights?

    Every week it's been the same, "The Voice is the best show in the history of TV, everyone's talking about it, all my friends don't stop talking about it, it's trending all over Twitter, a million posts have been posted in the thread, meanwhile BGT is old & tired, nobody is watching, it isn't trending, and the thread is really quiet"

    And then the ratings come out and both shows get the same sort of ratings :D

    Yeah, obviously there is a younger age profile watching the Voice who live on twitter
  • Options
    ronantronant Posts: 4,785
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    happy tv wrote: »
    It will be lower tomorrow night

    Why??
  • Options
    Chris1964Chris1964 Posts: 19,862
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    D.M.N. wrote: »

    ........someone posted that they had dislocated their jaw through yawning.
    No doubt someone must be able to qualify this or not?
  • Options
    SamuelWSamuelW Posts: 8,447
    Forum Member
    Chris1964 wrote: »
    ........someone posted that they had dislocated their jaw through yawning.
    No doubt someone must be able to qualify this or not?
    People on the BGT forum have said watching BGT after The Voice is like "being offered Lambrini after being used to vintage champagne" or "reading the daily star after reading the independent". Only 250% buzz on Zeebox tonight for BGT, even less buzz on Twitter.
  • Options
    grahamzxygrahamzxy Posts: 11,920
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    BGT is tired, repetitive, dated. the worst culprits are the judges - their script must date from 2007. It does still have the fun factor from the contestants - they make the show work (and naturally get paid zero.)

    I am not saying TV is the best thing in years but at least it looks fresh and the judges in the main are new to television.

    Tonight's predictions

    BGT 10.3m
    TV 10.9m
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,514
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    SamuelW wrote: »
    Only 250% buzz on Zeebox tonight for BGT, even less buzz on Twitter.

    The thing with BGT that there are enough times you can watch it without using the internet. I confess I watched In It to Win It tonight because I will be watching the lunchtime repeat of BGT tomorrow.
  • Options
    FuddFudd Posts: 167,056
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    SamuelW wrote: »
    People on the BGT forum have said watching BGT after The Voice is like "being offered Lambrini after being used to vintage champagne" or "reading the daily star after reading the independent". Only 250% buzz on Zeebox tonight for BGT, even less buzz on Twitter.

    Yes, we bloody get it. The Voice is great and should be on 24/7. Britain's Got Talent is crap which is heading towards the axe.

    NEXT.
  • Options
    SamuelWSamuelW Posts: 8,447
    Forum Member
    Fudd wrote: »
    Yes, we bloody get it. The Voice is great, Britain's Got Talent is crap which is heading towards the axe.

    NEXT.
    BGT is still rating well but how much more legs does the format have? CI4E said in America this time last year, the talent shows were doing well, but a year on people have got more bored of them, especially the older shows like Idol. Could the same thing happen here, too many talent shows being shown in the space of 12 months, meaning the older shows lose viewers more quickly than the newer shows?
  • Options
    jake lylejake lyle Posts: 6,146
    Forum Member
    SamuelW wrote: »
    Only 250% buzz on Zeebox tonight for BGT, even less buzz on Twitter.

    Was that for the entire show? At one point it was at 594
    SamuelW wrote: »
    , even less buzz on Twitter.
    It had 8/10 of the Uk trends a few minutes ago:eek:

    The DS thread is alredy more popular than last weeks.
  • Options
    FuddFudd Posts: 167,056
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    SamuelW wrote: »
    BGT is still rating well but how much more legs does the format have? CI4E said in America this time last year, the talent shows were doing well, but a year on people have got more bored of them, especially the older shows like Idol. Could the same thing happen here, too many talent shows being shown in the space of 12 months, meaning the older shows lose viewers more quickly than the newer shows?

    I think The X Factor could really suffer this year. It begs the question why the BBC felt the need for another talent show considering the number we have on at the moment, but there we go.
    *quickly retreats* ;):p

    I think Britain's Got Talent has more mileage but they need to steer away from the singers. The fact it's now running scared of The Voice is not a good sign at all but the scheduling arguably hurt it more than the standard of the early weeks.
  • Options
    Digital SidDigital Sid Posts: 39,870
    Forum Member
    happy tv wrote: »
    Yeah, obviously there is a younger age profile watching the Voice who live on twitter
    Fudd wrote: »
    Yes, we bloody get it. The Voice is great and should be on 24/7. Britain's Got Talent is crap which is heading towards the axe.

    NEXT.

    It's almost as if your both willing it to fail :D
  • Options
    SamuelWSamuelW Posts: 8,447
    Forum Member
    jake lyle wrote: »
    Was that for the entire show? At one point it was at 594

    It had 8/10 of the Uk trends a few minutes ago:eek:

    The DS thread is alredy more popular than last weeks.
    250% was at about 9pm when I checked. I had a look at the UK trends just a few mins ago and only Simon Cowell, Latin Chick and David Walliams were trending, I didnt notice 8 but that migthve changed.
    Fudd wrote: »
    I think Britain's Got Talent has more mileage but they need to steer away from the singers. The fact it's now running scared of The Voice is not a good sign at all but the scheduling arguably hurt it more than the standard of the early weeks.
    One thing which confuses me about BGT is that it doesn't use its format to its advantage. It is the only talent show which has the chance to show variety acts but there doesnt seem to be much variety in it as its singers and dancers most of the time I watch. It makes no sense to me why they would not show more variety acts to differentiate it from other talent shows like XFactor and The Voice. They have this advantage but are not making best use of it.
  • Options
    Digital SidDigital Sid Posts: 39,870
    Forum Member
    Fudd wrote: »
    I think The X Factor could really suffer this year. It begs the question why the BBC felt the need for another talent show considering the number we have on at the moment, but there we go.
    *quickly retreats* ;):p
    ITV felt the need more, didn't they outbid them for it? ;)
  • Options
    FuddFudd Posts: 167,056
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    It's almost as if your both willing it to fail :D

    :D

    I wouldn't care less if it wasn't on BBC One. I think it's a brilliant show to boost the fortunes of a commercial channel - look at NBC in the US and Nine in Australia. It is changing the TV landscape, and it's always good to have an ebb and flow to shows but...
  • Options
    Digital SidDigital Sid Posts: 39,870
    Forum Member
    jake lyle wrote: »
    Was that for the entire show? At one point it was at 594

    It had 8/10 of the Uk trends a few minutes ago:eek:

    The DS thread is alredy more popular than last weeks.

    But The Voice had half the worldwide ones throughout.
  • Options
    derek500derek500 Posts: 24,892
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    SamuelW wrote: »
    250% was at about 9pm when I checked. I had a look at the UK trends just a few mins ago and only Simon Cowell, Latin Chick and David Walliams were trending, I didnt notice 8 but that migthve changed.

    If you're not watching it, how would you what trends are BGT related?
  • Options
    Chris1964Chris1964 Posts: 19,862
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    SamuelW wrote: »
    250% was at about 9pm when I checked. I had a look at the UK trends just a few mins ago and only Simon Cowell, Latin Chick and David Walliams were trending, I didnt notice 8 but that migthve changed.


    One thing which confuses me about BGT is that it doesn't use its format to its advantage. It is the only talent show which has the chance to show variety acts but there doesnt seem to be much variety in it as its singers and dancers most of the time I watch. It makes no sense to me why they would not show more variety acts to differentiate it from other talent shows like XFactor and The Voice. They have this advantage but are not making best use of it.

    Are we to assume they are just not getting the variety to show of sufficient quality?
  • Options
    FuddFudd Posts: 167,056
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ITV felt the need more, didn't they outbid them for it? ;)

    They did. But I think it was more of a preventative offer than a serious one - they didn't want BBC One to get their hands on it for the very reason that it would cause them the problems that we're witnessing now.
  • Options
    SamuelWSamuelW Posts: 8,447
    Forum Member
    derek500 wrote: »
    If you're not watching it, how would you what trends are BGT related?
    I watched it from 9.20pm after In It To Win It finished, although had a look at Zeebox in the mean time while watching IITWI. I knew what trends to mostly look for after 9.20pm.
  • Options
    grahamzxygrahamzxy Posts: 11,920
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    BGT is such a cheap looking show - I think they mean for it to look like a 1970's variety show - kinda retro. We cannot argue with the ratings it gets though, people like cheese tv, they are certainly struggling to attract hundreds of quality acts.

    I applaud them getting so many unknown faces - shame mostly because they are from Eastern Europe or South America :D Simon was bored and angry tonight (as were many viewers) :)
  • Options
    Digital SidDigital Sid Posts: 39,870
    Forum Member
    Fudd wrote: »
    :D

    I wouldn't care less if it wasn't on BBC One. I think it's a brilliant show to boost the fortunes of a commercial channel - look at NBC in the US and Nine in Australia. It is changing the TV landscape, and it's always good to have an ebb and flow to shows but...

    What commercial channel should it be on here?
  • Options
    FuddFudd Posts: 167,056
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    What commercial channel should it be on here?

    Channel 4 have needed something fresh ever since they axed Big Brother...but IIRC they decided the format was too derivative! Channel 5, although in my opinion in a healthier state than Channel 4, could also do with a big hitter. Both channels could also have used it to boost the night overall.
  • Options
    Digital SidDigital Sid Posts: 39,870
    Forum Member
    Fudd wrote: »
    Channel 4 have needed something fresh ever since they axed Big Brother...but IIRC they decided the format was too derivative! Channel 5, although in my opinion in a healthier state than Channel 4, could also do with a big hitter. Both channels could also have used it to boost the night overall.

    If they turned down ITV's bigger offer to have the show on a bigger channel, they wouldn't have accepted Channel 4 or Channel 5's offers.
  • Options
    FuddFudd Posts: 167,056
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    If they turned down ITV's bigger offer to have the show on a bigger channel, they wouldn't have accepted Channel 4 or Channel 5's offers.

    My argument would be that the BBC shouldn't have even put in a bid.
This discussion has been closed.