The Ratings Thread (Part 45)

18283858788145

Comments

  • Andy23Andy23 Posts: 15,921
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The last few weeks may have been a trial to see where best to place Corrie on Wednesdays when it can't air at 7:30pm

    A few weeks ago it aired at 7pm, many people here blasted this decision and said it would be a disaster. In the end up, the ratings were practically uneffected.

    Last night they tried 9:30pm, it aired around that time for many years in the late 90s with no issue so there is precident for this. As it was the ratings were low.

    Therefore I expect in future Corrie will air at 7pm rather than 9:30pm whenever this occurs again.
  • FuddFudd Posts: 166,867
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Andy23 wrote: »
    The last few weeks may have been a trial to see where best to place Corrie on Wednesdays when it can't air at 7:30pm

    A few weeks ago it aired at 7pm, many people here blasted this decision and said it would be a disaster. In the end up, the ratings were practically uneffected.

    Last night they tried 9:30pm, it aired around that time for many years in the late 90s with no issue so there is precident for this. As it was the ratings were low.

    Therefore I expect in future Corrie will air at 7pm rather than 9:30pm whenever this occurs again.

    Doubt it when kick off is at 7.30pm. :p
  • F1KenF1Ken Posts: 4,229
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Fudd wrote: »
    The BBC potency in promotion has something to do this, in my opinion. With the number of radio stations and a high class website pushing sporting programmes it becomes something of an event as it feels as though everyone is talking about it. For whatever reasons, commercial networks don't have the same influence across different types of media. I bet the Grand National won't have the same impact as previous years now it's left the BBC.

    The National on the BBC was emotional let alone had Gravitas! The Music as well really just sent shivers down my spine and it felt like a great British event. Even now with the changes and the younger BBC Sport presenters the BBC's spots coverage has a traditional feel to it that I love. They really embrace the event and it's history.

    The National on C4 is going to be odd. Okay they will probably do a great job but it will feel to me like something is missing. Des lynam summed it up once when he was talking about being on ITV football. He said that they had a team just as talented that worked really hard and produced great coverage on par if not better than the beeb but at the end of the day it was just not the beeb.

    Call me silly or old fashioned but thats how I feel. Matbe it's an age thing.

    Ken
  • Agent FAgent F Posts: 40,288
    Forum Member
    Fudd wrote: »
    Doubt it when kick off is at 7.30pm. :p

    Indeed, that was what forced their hand. Otherwise I would have fully expected it to take the 7pm slot again.
  • TassiumTassium Posts: 31,639
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    BBC sport going to ITV is like BBC talent going to ITV, it rarely works.

    Whereas BBC sport going to CH4 might just work, CH4 have a history of taking sport more seriously than the BBC.

    Although I'm thinking more golden age CH4 rather than the turd factory it now is.
  • rivkinrivkin Posts: 400
    Forum Member
    Tassium wrote: »
    BBC sport going to ITV is like BBC talent going to ITV, it rarely works.

    Whereas BBC sport going to CH4 might just work, CH4 have a history of taking sport more seriously than the BBC.

    Although I'm thinking more golden age CH4 rather than the turd factory it now is.

    ant n dec from bbc to itv did well for themselves and the french open on itv 4 was actually better on that channel than the bbc as more matches were shown, highlights and studio chat.

    think the fact bbc had to team up with annoying rival sky to get fa cup n england games in past wasnt right.

    all sports get more cash on advert channels as unlike bbc they can have lots of investment options, know bbc best for sport but thats why its got a licence it should be the best shame tho it chooses to pay 22 million for 2 years rights to another companies show the voice and not invest in sport which it does best grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!
  • rivkinrivkin Posts: 400
    Forum Member
    late wed night corrie...

    although from reading the comments some mentioned the fact that itv had no option to screen kick of later due to the abroad channels screening etc a 7.00pm screening of corrie followed by football on nights of wednesday match's would avoid the lower ratings compared to other episodes.

    if the football on wednesday has to be screened at 7pm to avoid late screening of coronation street on the night itv should consider a 6.30pm time slot if the above ever happens again that way people watching itv+1 channel can see the soap at 7.30pm the usual time slot on wednesdays etc.
  • iaindbiaindb Posts: 13,278
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    ITV options for last night's Corrie:

    1) Move it to 6.45 like they're doing with Emmerdale next Thursday. However this would have meant only a 15 minute build-up to the game, less if you exclude the comercial break. Presume ITV would have opted for an 8pm kick-off if they'd had a choice.

    2) Move it to Thursday 8.30. However this woud have meant 45 minutes of post-match anaylsis which would probably have been too much (although Chiles would have been in its element, the big ten-year-old.) They could, though, have slotted in a You've Been Framed as a stop-gap and had a shorter, edited version in reserve in the (HIGHLY LIKELY!!!) event that the match runs late.

    In the end Corrie suffered because pretty much all of their viewers who watch Africa "live" watched Africa.
  • Steve WilliamsSteve Williams Posts: 11,816
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Fudd wrote: »
    'We'? Were you partly behind the move, Steve? :D:D:D

    In all seriousness, the issue ITV had with moving News at Ten is that it opened up the slot for BBC One to move the Nine o'clock News back an hour, which meant it could start it's post-watershed programming in line with ITV's offerings, rather than 9.25pm. This knocked ITV's figures which meant the 10pm shows weren't getting the kind of lead in they would have done had the Nine o'clock news stayed where it was.

    To be honest, I'm surprised OFCOM haven't tried to force either the BBC or ITV to move the late night news so they didn't clash; it seems ridiculous and unnecessary to have the two biggest channels airing the same thing at the same time (the evening news isn't so bad because the regional news tends to clash with the national news and vice versa).

    We, as in the Great British Public, natch.

    It wasn't entirely down to the BBC News moving to ten because ITV had eighteen months when the BBC was still at nine, and indeed they'd already anounced they were going to move back to ten when the BBC moved theirs to ten (which you may recall was right at the last minute, more or less at the exact time the schedules for that week were being finalised, and I remember funnily enough the ITV Lunchtime News breaking it in the headlines). And for the first few months of the 11pm news, the BBC were further handicapped by the fact that, because of the Local Elections, the Euro Elections and the Scottish and Welsh Assembly Elections, they had Party Political Broadcasts at 9.30 virtually non-stop for about eight weeks.

    As for forcing either channel to move, it seems unlikely that would be the case. Famously the ITC did demand the News at Ten to be at ten because in 1995 the first episode of the last series of Cracker was 75 minutes long and the ITC forced ITV to move it from Monday to Sunday, with just a few days to go, because they would not permit the news to be moved from ten due to reasons within ITV's control. I think that was because quite a lot of the regions had put in their licence applications they'd do the news at 10pm. It confused everyone because two nights later, they were allowed to move the news for football.

    If they were to force it now, ITV could easily stand up and say that they did move the news away from the Beeb, when they ran it at 10.30, and it didn't work, the ratings went down - and there's much more choice for the viewer now. Presumably it's considered better for news-avoiding viewers to only have to avoid it half an hour. And besides, in the seventies and early eighties, when there were only three channels, they actually forced BBC1 and ITV to both show religious programmes at the same time, and they also both showed current affairs with Panorama and World in Action at the same time.
    F1Ken wrote: »
    The National on C4 is going to be odd. Okay they will probably do a great job but it will feel to me like something is missing. Des lynam summed it up once when he was talking about being on ITV football. He said that they had a team just as talented that worked really hard and produced great coverage on par if not better than the beeb but at the end of the day it was just not the beeb.

    I don't agree with the thoery that the things do better on the Beeb because the radio and website go on about them, certainly all the press coverage of the England match yesterday is exactly as it would have been if it had been on the BBC, and the BBC Sport website always covers all sport fairly regardles of what channel it's on. And there are hundreds more commercial stations. You wouldn't say something like the Champions League Final isn't a big event and that hasn't been on the Beeb for nearly two decades.

    What I do agree with is that the Grand National will get a much smaller audience but I think that's because the Grand National is not a race for people who watch it week in week out, it has such a huge casual audience and the BBC coverage worked because it made it seem a special event. Whereas on C4, I think it's always going to come across as just another race. I don't mean the coverage should be dumbed down but it's simply out of the way of the general audience. I think that was actually the reasoning behind The Derby going to the Beeb in 2001, it wasn't seen as enough of an occasion on Channel Four.

    Same as the League Cup Final this year is only going to be seen as just another match on Sky Sports, whereas when it was on the BBC, and before that ITV, it was a special event.
  • marxavlenmarxavlen Posts: 851
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Also I notice Hollyoaks is doing extremely well at the moment. Over 1m for the C4 showing and over 800k for the E4 showing. Not sure if anything big is happening now - but those are some pretty decent figures for it.

    Hollyoaks is much better now than it has been for a few years, for me anyway. To me the ratings justify how good it is becoming again.
    F1Ken wrote: »
    great rating for ITV there. Africa held up really well and deserved to because it was a great series. Really enjoyed it.

    England Games to me don't have the atmosphere they did back in the BBC days. I suspect that's me being silly but they don't feel as big any more. That's why I thought it was good the BBC used to cover the FA stuff because they bring gravitas to an event even if they cover it in an unspectacular way.

    Ken

    I thought last night's game had quite a bit of atmosphere, but I do agree in general terms of the England Internationals. I do suspect the Premier League has a little something to do with people's high expectations, although the expectations were very low for the Euros. I think under Hodgson though, England will bounce back, and they have been playing well, especially last night (best I've seen them play in years).
  • marxavlenmarxavlen Posts: 851
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Same as the League Cup Final this year is only going to be seen as just another match on Sky Sports, whereas when it was on the BBC, and before that ITV, it was a special event.

    I agree very much with this. It's even more of a shame that this season's League Cup has had more publicity (good and bad) than previous years, yet one of the biggest Lge Cup final's in years will be hidden behind a £42 pay-wall. I suspect the BBC highlights will be flat.
  • iaindbiaindb Posts: 13,278
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Option 3 for ITV last night. They should have shown the game on delay. It was a only a pigging friendly.:p

    And what's all this about England going to win the World Cup just cos they beat Brazil. I seem to recall the beat Spain just prior to the European Championship. Remind me again who went on to win the tournament. Cos I'm pretty syre it wasn't England.:rolleyes: (From a Scot, in a state of shock cos his team actually won a game last night.:eek: Suggest Gordon Strachan quits as manager and then he can leave with a 100% record.)
  • AdsAds Posts: 37,037
    Forum Member
    iaindb wrote: »
    Option 3 for ITV last night. They should have shown the game on delay. It was a only a pigging friendly.:p

    And what's all this about England going to win the World Cup just cos they beat Brazil. I seem to recall the beat Spain just prior to the European Championship. Remind me again who went on to win the tournament. Cos I'm pretty syre it wasn't England.:rolleyes: (From a Scot, in a state of shock cos his team actually won a game last night.:eek: Suggest Gordon Strachan quits as manager and then he can leave with a 100% record.)

    Why can't ITV simply have an 8.15 kickoff time, so Corrie starts at its normal time and they have 15 minutes game build up?
  • NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 8,635
    Forum Member
    A new (three-part) drama for BBC Three, so the end of Being Human isn't the end of drama altogether:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2013/bbc-three-new-programming.html

    A few ratings stats at the bottom of the article, too.

    For posterity:
    Key stats

    - BBC Three was the most watched digital channel in the hours it broadcasts in 2012 (achieving a 2.9% share)
    - Among the target 16-34 audience, BBC Three was the number one channel in 2012 – with a 6% share, up from 5.5% last year, an increase of 0.5 share points or a 9% y-o-y increase
    - BBC Three has the second highest AI of all the BBC Services across TV and Radio in 2012
    - Live +7 numbers for Cuckoo and Bad Ed 3.5m, Russell Howard 2.9m, Sun Sex 2.68m, Junior Docs 2.32m
    - On average, BBC Three reaches over 13.3 million people each week (23% of individuals), and reaches 30% of the target 16-34 audience - 4.37m
    - Successful original series, 21 eps got over 1m viewers

    BIB - pretty sure they mean "digital channel" there.
  • NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 8,635
    Forum Member
    Ads wrote: »
    Why can't ITV simply have an 8.15 kickoff time, so Corrie starts at its normal time and they have 15 minutes game build up?

    Last night's early start was because of Brazilian TV's request. I think for home games normally the UK broadcasters have some influence. I can't remember a game ever being scheduled to start as late as 20:15 however, so maybe they can't start after a certain time due to police concerns, local-authority restrictions etc.
  • FuddFudd Posts: 166,867
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    We, as in the Great British Public, natch.

    It wasn't entirely down to the BBC News moving to ten because ITV had eighteen months when the BBC was still at nine, and indeed they'd already anounced they were going to move back to ten when the BBC moved theirs to ten (which you may recall was right at the last minute, more or less at the exact time the schedules for that week were being finalised, and I remember funnily enough the ITV Lunchtime News breaking it in the headlines). And for the first few months of the 11pm news, the BBC were further handicapped by the fact that, because of the Local Elections, the Euro Elections and the Scottish and Welsh Assembly Elections, they had Party Political Broadcasts at 9.30 virtually non-stop for about eight weeks.

    I remember the BBC moving the news at such a last minute than 50 minute shows had to be padded out with 10 minute programmes from 9pm to make up the hour - I thought it was as soon as ITV moved News at Ten but was it so they could get the jump on News at Ten's return? :o
  • sn_22sn_22 Posts: 6,460
    Forum Member
    I don't agree with the thoery that the things do better on the Beeb because the radio and website go on about them, certainly all the press coverage of the England match yesterday is exactly as it would have been if it had been on the BBC, and the BBC Sport website always covers all sport fairly regardles of what channel it's on. And there are hundreds more commercial stations. You wouldn't say something like the Champions League Final isn't a big event and that hasn't been on the Beeb for nearly two decades.

    What I do agree with is that the Grand National will get a much smaller audience but I think that's because the Grand National is not a race for people who watch it week in week out, it has such a huge casual audience and the BBC coverage worked because it made it seem a special event. Whereas on C4, I think it's always going to come across as just another race. I don't mean the coverage should be dumbed down but it's simply out of the way of the general audience. I think that was actually the reasoning behind The Derby going to the Beeb in 2001, it wasn't seen as enough of an occasion on Channel Four.

    Yes, I think the 'BBC saturation coverage' rule generally applies better to sports other than football (which is saturated in media coverage anyway).

    It's for stuff like the Six Nations at the moment where the cross-promotion really comes into its own. It's like a metaphorical flashing sign: "CASUAL FANS - It's time to take up your passing interest in rugby again". Works on me every time! :D
  • Andy23Andy23 Posts: 15,921
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    And nothing brings in casual viewers more than the sporting event being on BBC1

    If this wasn't the case, then why does the BBC move Wimbledon matches from 2 to 1 at a moments notice.
  • rr22rr22 Posts: 7,618
    Forum Member
    In such cash strapped times id like to think the bbc will concentrate on its drama and comedy. Let the inflated sports rights go to the greedy commercial giants its not what the channels are about. The olympics proved the bbc does sport outstandingly well it created wonderful television for the corporation and it covered it superbly but its main focus needs to be creating dramas that will be held in the vaults for years to come and sold over the world and comedy that the public pay the fee for. Sports events can be made elsewhere even if the bbc do cover it well.
  • ronantronant Posts: 4,785
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Lord Sugar ‏@Lord_Sugar
    RT: will there be another series of Young Apprentice. hope so..... NO BBC HAVE DECIDED TO STOP IT
  • FuddFudd Posts: 166,867
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Does anyone have the official figures for Great Night Out, please? I've got a real soft spot for it so I hope it's doing enough of a job to be renewed. :o
  • NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 8,635
    Forum Member
    ronant wrote: »
    Lord Sugar ‏@Lord_Sugar
    RT: will there be another series of Young Apprentice. hope so..... NO BBC HAVE DECIDED TO STOP IT

    Well done BBC, correct decision. Surprised they managed to overcome Sugar's ego.
  • FuddFudd Posts: 166,867
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    NeilVW wrote: »
    Well done BBC, correct decision. Surprised they managed to overcome Sugar's ego.

    I think Donald Trump may have dented that a few weeks ago.
  • Steve WilliamsSteve Williams Posts: 11,816
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    NeilVW wrote: »
    Last night's early start was because of Brazilian TV's request. I think for home games normally the UK broadcasters have some influence. I can't remember a game ever being scheduled to start as late as 20:15 however, so maybe they can't start after a certain time due to police concerns, local-authority restrictions etc.

    They have had at last one 8.15 kick-off since they've been on ITV, I think it was the game against Andorra, when they did start the coveage at 8pm. As you say, normally home matches will start at a time requested by ITV, usually 8pm, but presumably this time Brazilian TV offered more money to move it. Like ten years ago how Fulham played a Uefa Cup match at home to Hertha Berlin at 6pm, long before the centralised kick-off times, because German TV offered them a million pounds to kick off then.
    Fudd wrote: »
    I remember the BBC moving the news at such a last minute than 50 minute shows had to be padded out with 10 minute programmes from 9pm to make up the hour - I thought it was as soon as ITV moved News at Ten but was it so they could get the jump on News at Ten's return? :o

    Well as far as I can recall, ITV announced in September 2000 they were going to move back to ten the following January, and then the Beeb announced they were going to move in October 2000 - because it started on 16th October. It was clearly a last minute move because the news went widescreen at the start of October, so they made a new widescreen version of the Nine O'Clock News titles which they used for two weeks, then had to replace.

    And yeah, loads of shows ended up starting at ten past and ten to the hour, and regular shows like Holiday, Watchdog and Top of the Pops would regularly run any time between 25 and 40 minutes depending on what else was coming up later. In fact imagine if this thread was running at the time as in any given week EastEnders could start at 7.25, 7.30 or 7.35.
  • davey_waveydavey_wavey Posts: 27,406
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Fudd wrote: »
    Does anyone have the official figures for Great Night Out, please? I've got a real soft spot for it so I hope it's doing enough of a job to be renewed. :o

    I hope it's doing a good enough job to be renewed as well. I'm really enjoying it :) the series has believable characters and the cast all gel really well together. There are some good laugh out loud moments.
This discussion has been closed.