Dr Who Ratings Thread

1125126128130131512

Comments

  • MulettMulett Posts: 9,055
    Forum Member
    Anyone know the AI and audience share average for each season so far?
  • Whovian1109Whovian1109 Posts: 1,812
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    85? So average for 7b so far then? That's 3 85's in a row isn't it? Which makes sense, some have loved and then some have hated all of them, suppose it ends up evening out.
  • Dr TheteDr Thete Posts: 573
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Mulett wrote: »
    Anyone know the AI and
    audience share
    average for each season so far?

    AI - Share

    Series 1: 83 - 40
    Series 2: 84 - 41
    Series 3: 86 - 39
    Series 4: 88 - 39
    Specials: 88 - 43
    Series 5: 86 - 37
    Series 6: 86 - 33
    Series 7: 86 - 33 (note, three shares from 7b are missing)

    The dropping share is a function of increased choice and PVR/VoD usage. Average BBC One share has fallen further (though it rose a bit last year) than the Who share.
  • WelshNigeWelshNige Posts: 4,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Dr Thete wrote: »
    AI - Share

    Series 1: 83 - 40
    Series 2: 84 - 41
    Series 3: 86 - 39
    Series 4: 88 - 39
    Specials: 88 - 43
    Series 5: 86 - 37
    Series 6: 86 - 33
    Series 7: 86 - 33 (note, three shares from 7b are missing)

    The dropping share is a function of increased choice and PVR/VoD usage. Average BBC One share has fallen further (though it rose a bit last year) than the Who share.

    Is there really that much more choice now than there was in 2005??

    And I thought share was increased to take into account PVR/VoD usage??
  • CD93CD93 Posts: 13,939
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    iPlayer launched in 2007.
  • AlrightmateAlrightmate Posts: 73,120
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    If a Doctor Who episode gets the highest rating in its timeslot, I don't think that you can really blame the episode.
    Because it would mean that not many people were watching television overall. So its not the case that most people chose to watch something else instead. It means that most people chose to not watch television at all.

    If a television show achieves the highest rating for its timeslot but its actual figure is relatively low, the show wouldn't be so much in competition with other TV shows on other channels, it would more be in competition with other factors such as nice weather where everyone wants to be out on a Bank Holiday weekend.
    It's hard to know how what to do to directly compete with that if people turn off television itself.
    I guess the only way to counter this problem is to show the series at a different time of year.
  • MulettMulett Posts: 9,055
    Forum Member
    Dr Thete wrote: »
    AI - Share

    Series 1: 83 - 40
    Series 2: 84 - 41
    Series 3: 86 - 39
    Series 4: 88 - 39
    Specials: 88 - 43
    Series 5: 86 - 37
    Series 6: 86 - 33
    Series 7: 86 - 33 (note, three shares from 7b are missing)

    The dropping share is a function of increased choice and PVR/VoD usage. Average BBC One share has fallen further (though it rose a bit last year) than the Who share.

    Thank you - really interesting.
  • Dr TheteDr Thete Posts: 573
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    WelshNige wrote: »
    Is there really that much more choice now than there was in 2005??

    Yes. Back in 2005 the majority of people had access to only five channels, PVR ownership was very low, and iPlayer didn't exist.

    Now PVR ownership has hit the 50% plus point, iPlayer is huge, and everyone has access to between c. 30 and 300 channels, including +1s.
    And I thought share was increased to take into account PVR/VoD usage??

    No. It's a share of 100%, and it remains so no matter how many things are watched.

    Rough example.

    Four people had live TV only, each watched a different programme between 8pm and 9pm, but each missed another (different again) programme they were also interested in. The shares for that hour for them worked out as:

    Programme A - 25%
    Programme B - 25%
    Programme C - 25%
    Programme D - 25%

    They each then bought a PVR, and were each able to watch both programmes they were interested in from 8pm to 9pm. The shares for that hour then worked out as:

    Programme A - 12.5%
    Programme B - 12.5%
    Programme C - 12.5%
    Programme D - 12.5%
    Programme E - 12.5%
    Programme F - 12.5%
    Programme G - 12.5%
    Programme H - 12.5%

    Now shows do increase their shares once timeshift is added in, but so do other shows, so Doctor Who can increase its share very well, but still can't hit the levels of earlier years with less competition.
  • MulettMulett Posts: 9,055
    Forum Member
    Dr Thete wrote: »
    Now shows do increase their shares once timeshift is added in, but so do other shows, so Doctor Who can increase its share very well, but still can't hit the levels of earlier years with less competition.

    Oh, it takes me back to the days when we only had three channels and no video recorders. If you didn't watch something when it was broadcast you just simply missed it :)
  • Dr TheteDr Thete Posts: 573
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    If a Doctor Who episode gets the highest rating in its timeslot, I don't think that you can really blame the episode.
    Because it would mean that not many people were watching television overall. So its not the case that most people chose to watch something else instead. It means that most people chose to not watch television at all.

    If a television show achieves the highest rating for its timeslot but its actual figure is relatively low, the show wouldn't be so much in competition with other TV shows on other channels, it would more be in competition with other factors such as nice weather where everyone wants to be out on a Bank Holiday weekend.
    It's hard to know how what to do to directly compete with that if people turn off television itself.
    I guess the only way to counter this problem is to show the series at a different time of year.

    In the light of ratings from Sunday as well, with even a peak time show like Endeavour hitting 4.9m in the peak 8pm slot (and was the only thing to break 5m even with +1), it, brings home that only the two big talent shows bucked the trend this weekend.
  • Dr TheteDr Thete Posts: 573
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Mulett wrote: »
    Oh, it takes me back to the days when we only had three channels and no video recorders. If you didn't watch something when it was broadcast you just simply missed it :)

    Luxury.

    I grew up with one channel *, which started broadcasting at 7pm (5.30pm on Saturdays, 3.30pm on Sundays), and shut down shortly after midnight.

    I used to dream of having three channels.


    * unless I tuned into Moroccan TV, and watched William Hartnell speaking Arabic.
  • MulettMulett Posts: 9,055
    Forum Member
    Dr Thete wrote: »
    I used to dream of having three channels.

    Possibly, my favourite post ever!! :)
  • VerenceVerence Posts: 104,576
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    Dr Thete wrote: »
    Luxury.

    I grew up with one channel *, which started broadcasting at 7pm (5.30pm on Saturdays, 3.30pm on Sundays), and shut down shortly after midnight.

    I used to dream of having three channels.


    * unless I tuned into Moroccan TV, and watched William Hartnell speaking Arabic.

    Luxury!!!

    I only had one channel which closed down for the night five minutes before it started broadcasting and we got a massive electric shock if we even got within 5 feet of the TV set

    You try telling the young people of today that and they wouldn't believe you!!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 52
    Forum Member
    Any update on Timeshifted figures for The Crimson Horror?

    Original Overnight - 4.61m

    Most recent timeshift (7Days) for the previous few episodes has been in the region of 1.6m so hopefully we should see.....6.2m ??
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 942
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    OswaldBar wrote: »
    Any update on Timeshifted figures for The Crimson Horror?

    Original Overnight - 4.61m

    Most recent timeshift (7Days) for the previous few episodes has been in the region of 1.6m so hopefully we should see.....6.2m ??

    Hopefully we can get over the 6million mark.... It's such a shame that this 'dip' has happened in the last few weeks.

    Hopefully some Cybermen & The Doctors Name can boost us up a bit.... Maybe back to some 7m finals. ;)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 52
    Forum Member
    SJB 2007 wrote: »
    Hopefully we can get over the 6million mark.... It's such a shame that this 'dip' has happened in the last few weeks.

    Hopefully some Cybermen & The Doctors Name can boost us up a bit.... Maybe back to some 7m finals. ;)

    It is a shame, however, the consolidated figures are still quite strong in comparison to other dramas and I dont think we need to worry too much, my personal belief for this slight drop in ratings (which happens almost every year mid series) is down to scheduling time changes, competition (namely BGT) and a severe lack of Promotion during the week. I think a boost will come in the next two episodes and we will be back above the 7m mark all being well. Brave Heart Tegan!!!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 942
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Aussie ratings for those who are interested....
    Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS has picked up an additional 123,000 time-shifted Australian viewers, giving it a final, or consolidated, ratings average of 849,000 viewers in the five major capital cities. This was the fifth largest number of time-shifted viewers for a program broadcast on Sunday 28 April. The final or consolidated ratings includes all 'time-shifted' viewers who record the program and watch it within a week.

    Based on these final figures, Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS was the highest rating ABC program of the day and the ninth highest rating program of the day overall (it was also the ninth highest rating program based on its overnight figures of 725,000 viewers). These ratings do not include regional viewers.
  • Banks246Banks246 Posts: 521
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Any update on the viewing figures for Crimson Horror?
  • Yog101Yog101 Posts: 532
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Crimson Horror is currently sitting at 6.119m
  • TheSilentFezTheSilentFez Posts: 11,103
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Sorry, I don't usually frequent this thread, but does anyone know if there's any noticeable difference in the viewing figures between episodes which air at 6:00 or 6:15 and those which air at 7:00?
    I much prefer it when Doctor Who is on later. A 7:00 to 7:30 timeslot is perfect. I don't particularly like it when it's on at 6:30 or earlier.
  • Whovian1109Whovian1109 Posts: 1,812
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yog101 wrote: »
    Crimson Horror is currently sitting at 6.119m

    Ah it's timeshifting at about average then? Nothing disastrous, still above 6, hopefully it can with a final push hit 6.5 (does timeshift include the Friday night BBC3 repeat?)
  • Dr TheteDr Thete Posts: 573
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Sorry, I don't usually frequent this thread, but does anyone know if there's any noticeable difference in the viewing figures between episodes which air at 6:00 or 6:15 and those which air at 7:00?
    I much prefer it when Doctor Who is on later. A 7:00 to 7:30 timeslot is perfect. I don't particularly like it when it's on at 6:30 or earlier.

    There's no obvious impact that can be separated from other factors. Which, essentially, means we don't know and can't tell.
    Ah it's timeshifting at about average then? Nothing disastrous, still above 6, hopefully it can with a final push hit 6.5 (does timeshift include the Friday night BBC3 repeat?)

    Based on earlier weeks, we'd be looking at a probable 0.3/0.4m further increase, ending with 6.4/6.5m. A higher timeshift than previous weeks is a given, being that we're at 1.5m already.

    'The Hungry Earth' went from 4.56m to 6.44m, an increase of 1.88m. That's the nearest comparison we have.

    BBC Three is not included, but it is part of the weekly reach figure (all who watch within a week from any source).
  • nebogipfelnebogipfel Posts: 8,375
    Forum Member
    Well, I for one used to like Dr Thete. But now I know he had, but blew , the oppportunity to point recording devices at the telly and capture all the Hartnell stories albeit in Arabic , I've had pause for thought. Has there ever been a more shortsighted human being? Makes my blood boil.
  • Dr TheteDr Thete Posts: 573
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    nebogipfel wrote: »
    Well, I for one used to like Dr Thete. But now I know he had, but blew , the oppportunity to point recording devices at the telly and capture all the Hartnell stories albeit in Arabic , I've had pause for thought. Has there ever been a more shortsighted human being? Makes my blood boil.

    Perhaps I can improve things between us by noting that, if my very young self had had the foresight to do that, it wouldn't have helped.

    According to this site the only Hartnell's they bought were all ones we still have copies of (indeed, the most recent 'Aztecs' DVD release even has an Arabic dubbed episode on it):

    http://broadwcast.org/
    A An Unearthly Child 1
    B The Daleks 7
    C Inside the Spaceship 2
    E The Keys of Marinus 6
    F The Aztecs 4
    G The Sensorites 6
    J Planet of Giants 3
    K The Dalek Invasion of Earth 6
    L The Rescue 2

    Am I forgiven?
  • nebogipfelnebogipfel Posts: 8,375
    Forum Member
    Ah. On second thoughts I imagine you thought to yourself "well, these stories have a good chance of surviving due to being copied and sent overseas. No need to panic.". Very perceptive of you! :)
Sign In or Register to comment.