[guestofseth]

Originally Posted by Score

Lewis part 1 was 8.2m only with +1 - without it was 7.75m so the drop wasn't much at all.

Another reason why both figures should be made clear on here, to avoid this confusion, for the past few weeks officials (and a lot of overnights as well) posted on here have just included +1, with only @TVRatingsUK providing consolidated figures without +1. I always thought there was an unwritten rule that both figures would be posted so that all posters are happy and can compare ratings how they like. I think that's why there's been so many +1 arguments lately, and in some cases it seems it's being done deliberately to cause arguments.

I've wanted to post this a few times but didn't want to annoy anybody, I think all those who provide us with the ratings do an excellent job but the +1 arguments are tiresome, and the lack of ratings without +1 (the ones I feel should be used for comparisons, the main reason for this thread) has caused a lot more of them.

[Hassaan13]

Superb for The Chase averaging over 4m. Do you think it'll manage that figure regularly from now on or go back to around 3m once the snow has gone?

Also, quite a while since I've seen one of the soaps over 10m in the overnights. When was the last time Corrie managed 10m+ in the overnights?

[johnnymc]

Originally Posted by cylon6

That's a shame for ITV as Laura Mackie and Sally Haynes have been excellent drama commissioners for the channel. Who will get the job at ITV? Could they be looking at the BBC's Ben Stephenson?

I think they would attempt to poach him to the channel due to the extra ordinary success he has had on the bbc. He has been with the beeb a while hope they keep him as he would be a loss to itv s gain.

[Georged123]

Originally Posted by guestofseth

Another reason why both figures should be made clear on here, to avoid this confusion, for the past few weeks officials (and a lot of overnights as well) posted on here have just included +1, with only @TVRatingsUK providing consolidated figures without +1. I always thought there was an unwritten rule that both figures would be posted so that all posters are happy and can compare ratings how they like. I think that's why there's been so many +1 arguments lately, and in some cases it seems it's being done deliberately to cause arguments.

I've wanted to post this a few times but didn't want to annoy anybody, I think all those who provide us with the ratings do an excellent job but the +1 arguments are tiresome, and the lack of ratings without +1 (the ones I feel should be used for comparisons, the main reason for this thread) has caused a lot more of them.

Totally agree. Both sets of figures should be posted and then posters can decide as to which set they want to use.

[Dancc]

Originally Posted by guestofseth

Another reason why both figures should be made clear on here, to avoid this confusion, for the past few weeks officials (and a lot of overnights as well) posted on here have just included +1, with only @TVRatingsUK providing consolidated figures without +1. I always thought there was an unwritten rule that both figures would be posted so that all posters are happy and can compare ratings how they like. I think that's why there's been so many +1 arguments lately, and in some cases it seems it's being done deliberately to cause arguments.

I've wanted to post this a few times but didn't want to annoy anybody, I think all those who provide us with the ratings do an excellent job but the +1 arguments are tiresome, and the lack of ratings without +1 (the ones I feel should be used for comparisons, the main reason for this thread) has caused a lot more of them.

I can't speak for everybody but from my POV it would take too long to do the +1 figures separately. And for me the +1 audiences are getting too big to ignore now, so posting just the exc. +1 figures wouldn't be credible (IMO).

If anyone else wishes to post the exc. +1 figures as well, then good luck to them. But I will stick to my way of doing it because it takes long enough to do as it is. Sorry.

[SamuelW]

Originally Posted by Servalan

Sorry - your memory is playing tricks on you. Mackie and Haynes were at ITV when The Palace, Rock Rivals, Whistleblowers, Harley Street and many other duds were commissioned.

They've revived the channel's drama fortunes in part since then but at the expense of any originality - their hits are either carbon copies of other shows or linked to existing franchises. It's been enough to spin a PR line about 'a drama rennaissance' - but that's not strictly true ... and for every hit there have been many more flops. They certainly haven't got the channel back to where it used to be, churning out one drama smash after another and flattening the opposition. And yes, I know viewing habits have changed and there are more channels than there used to be - but a major hit is still a major hit, and ITV has nothing like as many in drama as it used to have.

True. Itv has had three returning hits: Downton abbey, whitechapel and Scott and Bailey as well as middling crime shows like Law and order and Inspector banks. Thats not many proper returning hit shows in the space of five years. Last year none of their new dramas rated well. BBC's Ben Stephenson in less time has found: Sherlock, Call the Midwife, Luther, Last Tango in Halifax, Death in Paradise, The Paradise, Silk which is not only more shows but a wider range of genres.

[Brekkie]

Originally Posted by guestofseth

Another reason why both figures should be made clear on here, to avoid this confusion, for the past few weeks officials (and a lot of overnights as well) posted on here have just included +1, with only @TVRatingsUK providing consolidated figures without +1. I always thought there was an unwritten rule that both figures would be posted so that all posters are happy and can compare ratings how they like. I think that's why there's been so many +1 arguments lately, and in some cases it seems it's being done deliberately to cause arguments.

Why on earth does it cause you such a problem. We're all bright enough here to mentally adjust the figures to factor in whether +1 is or is not excluded - and figures with and without +1 are freely available online for anyone who wants them.

[Pizzatheaction]

Just subscribing to the new thread.

Judging by yesterday's ratings, Jeremy Kyle has some new fans who are postmen or teachers.

[derek500]

The broadcaster is keen to build on the 350,000 Sky homes that watched the Olympic Games in 3D, and all 4.5m Sky subscribers who have an HD set top box are theoretically able to view 3D content.

http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/news/b...050910.article

350,000 homes 22 months after launch. Not far behind Sky HD, which reached 358,000 after 17 months.

What did Mr Stink get according to BARB? 12,000 and that included the likes of RobbieSykes123 and other non-Sky viewers!!

[hyperstarsponge]

JK show is annoying, But at least we have a new thread at last

[Pizzatheaction]

Happy Birthday, Brekkie!

Just spotted your name on the index page.

[Barkers_Nipple]

18:30 Hollyoaks: 1.45m (6.1%)

Wow .. high for Hollyoaks on Ch 4 .. from memory Friday's E4 was over 0.8m .. Hollyoaks with +1 and omnibus knocking on for 3 million?

[wizzywick]

Originally Posted by Brekkie

It's only really you who has a major issue with +1 - and if someone like Dancc takes the effort to post the ratings and opts not to split them you are still free to post the split down version.

And looking ahead a week but a bit of a wildcard at 9pm next Monday with BBC3 airing Prince Harry in Afghanistan.

It isn't just Robbie. There are several who like to see ratings excluding +1. And, no one is disputing Dancc's and others for their efforts, but I believe Robbie was polite with his request. Of course the request doesn't have to be carried out and that is indeed the posters prerogative, but +1 figures added on as definitive totals is something some like to regard as official, but there are plenty of people who don't.

[Charnham]

yes, I would put a vote down, for ratings both with and without +1, simply so we get a full picture.

[KennyT]

Originally Posted by derek500

http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/news/b...050910.article

350,000 homes 22 months after launch. Not far behind Sky HD, which reached 358,000 after 17 months.

What did Mr Stink get according to BARB? 12,000 and that included the likes of RobbieSykes123 and other non-Sky viewers!!

Presumably, part of the problem is that timeshifted viewings are assigned by audio matching, and, unless I've forgotten someone telling me the answer, that just goes according to what the viewer normally uses, even if they actually had recorded and watched the HD broadcast?

K

[wizzywick]

Originally Posted by Brekkie

Why on earth does it cause you such a problem. We're all bright enough here to mentally adjust the figures to factor in whether +1 is or is not excluded - and figures with and without +1 are freely available online for anyone who wants them.

Can you stop questioning other peoples opinions and views. You are not the opinion police. It causes me a problem too. But there are several people with differing viewpoints to me, but I never ask them why their views causes a problem.

[wizzywick]

Originally Posted by Dancc

I can't speak for everybody but from my POV it would take too long to do the +1 figures separately. And for me the +1 audiences are getting too big to ignore now, so posting just the exc. +1 figures wouldn't be credible (IMO).

If anyone else wishes to post the exc. +1 figures as well, then good luck to them. But I will stick to my way of doing it because it takes long enough to do as it is. Sorry.

At least you posted a response Dancc. That in itself is appreciated.

I disagree about +1 ratings being "too big" though. Sometimes they are as little as 200K, and occasionally just over a million. So what I will do is take a million off your figures and use that as the official overnight.

[Hassaan13]

CBeebies peaked with 647k (3.4%) at 17:35. CBBC peaked with 355k (2.7%) at 16:15.

[bananashake]

Originally Posted by Barkers_Nipple

18:30 Hollyoaks: 1.45m (6.1%)

Wow .. high for Hollyoaks on Ch 4 .. from memory Friday's E4 was over 0.8m .. Hollyoaks with +1 and omnibus knocking on for 3 million?

Yes, Friday's E4 episode has 0.97k, inc. +1, and 1.45m yesterday, also inc. +1. Additionally, last nights E4 episode achieved 1.26m!! Completely staggering figures, just shows you don't need big explosions to pull in figures. Hope they keep it up.

[Dancc]

Originally Posted by wizzywick

At least you posted a response Dancc. That in itself is appreciated.

I disagree about +1 ratings being "too big" though. Sometimes they are as little as 200K, and occasionally just over a million. So what I will do is take a million off your figures and use that as the official overnight.

Uh, okay.

Don't forget the likes of DS and Broadcast provide a short daily summary of the main ratings of the night including the commercial TV figures excluding +1. You can always use my roundups in conjunction with those ones for any primetime BBC1/ITV comparisons.

[johnnymc]

Surprised that given its better performances EastEnders did not receive a slight snow boost to its figures like Coronation Street or the One show. Perhaps its catch up is preferable to viewers now

[tobi]

Originally Posted by johnnymc

Surprised that given its better performances EastEnders did not receive a slight snow boost to its figures like Coronation Street or the One show. Perhaps its catch up is preferable to viewers now

I wonder if that is because Coronation Street and the One Show have an older audience, who are more likely to stay inside during the cold conditions. Could be wrong but just a thought.

[RobbieSykes123]

That +1 figures are getting too big to ignore is part of the problem. ITV's figures are being boosted by maybe 5% or more through aggregation and it is distorting the true picture in the battle with BBC1. The playing field is getting ever more unlevel.

I don't understand why it is easier to post aggregate figures than separate because you have to go to the trouble of adding them up if you post "ITV Total" figures.

[Dancc]

Originally Posted by RobbieSykes123

That +1 figures are getting too big to ignore is part of the problem. ITV's figures are being boosted by maybe 5% or more through aggregation and it is distorting the true picture in the battle with BBC1. The playing field is getting ever more unlevel.

I don't understand why it is easier to post aggregate figures than separate because you have to go to the trouble of adding them up if you post "ITV Total" figures.

Nah, my source does that bit for me. To post them separately would involve doing everything twice using two separate datasheets for each commercial channel. And that's a ballache. So I won't be doing it.

I'm not the only person who does the roundups though and others may choose to do it in a different more crowd-pleasing way. But spending an hour plus typing out the numbers doesn't sound very appealing to me so I'll stick to my method on the days I'm here to do it.

Follow @TVRatingsUK on Twitter for headline figures each morning, with & without +1.

[D.M.N.]

I'd be grateful for the ratings, seeing as anyone can access them - which has been the case since mid November.

But never mind, let's continue this tedious +1 argument which seemingly never will go away, instead of talking about the plethora of figures we have in front of us.