Channel 5 now have rights to BIG brother, can somebody give an estimate of how many viewers this will rake in?:rolleyes:
This will be a very interesting test to see if there will be a major drop in viewers from when it was on C4 . Of course if they make too many changes that will affect the number of viewers and they must have Davina.
250k? No way im thinking more like 2.2-3.2 million
No way will it get that many.
Big Brother 11 was usually getting 2.2m-2.6m every night. That was an increase on Big Brother 10 though which had very bad ratings (i think it dipped to below 1m at one point), probably because it was the last ever series. How many of those viewers will stay with it to channel 5, and how many new people will even know about it when it returns, depends. I imagine 1m-1.5m, probably not much higher.
I absolutely agree. But you take a look at the majority of responses on this thread, and people are blaming the quality of the content. And they're either doing that through naivety or to try and be funny.
Never had any problem with the content- that I liked. ITV has just as much rubbish(for me) as Five. It's they way they went American in presenting the broadcasts. Surely a new channel needs to be building an audience, not driving away viewers?
Never had any problem with the content- that I liked. ITV has just as much rubbish(for me) as Five. It's they way they went American in presenting the broadcasts. Surely a new channel needs to be building an audience, not driving away viewers?
Channel 5 has a high number of excellent quality documentaries, films and drama....
No they don’t. They’re the home of the freakshow/Hitler/shark documentaries, they’re one of the few broadcasters that STILL pans and scans widescreen films and I don’t call wall-to-wall CSI to be anything other than lazy, wallpaper drama scheduling. To put the icing on the cake when they do get great shows like Breaking Bad or Justified they’re shoved, out of sight and stuffed with ads on FiveUSA (or whatever they’ll be calling it next month) and even rushed out five nights a week post-midnight at Xmas as BB was.
This is a channel that thinks following an ex-Big Brother contestant around or filming Eddie Stobart trucks up and down the motorway constitutes worthwhile television. They’re shitpeddlers to the underclass. And they know it.
Not sure the second one still applies anymore given that anyone can receive C5 with digital tv of any kind nowadays. As for your third point, maybe but its no worse than C4 right now imo. At least C5's schedule isn't stuffed with property programmes.
One of many examples. This is probably the worst of the lot, along with the jumping kangaroo one. American broadcasts have these as well. Might as well watch at US pace than on Five.
One of many examples. This is probably the worse along with the jumping kangaroo. American broadcasts have these as well. Might as well watch at US pace than on Five.
In fairness, that is particularly bad, though not as bad as the time it went out in a documentary about a train crash. But they only started doing that in 2008, and the whole issue of their programmes rating relatively worse than other terrestrial channels was present well before this.
Five months of Big Borether could prove to be a poisoned chalice as viewers will get bored with it. I can foresee Channel 5 dropping it when the two year deal ends. I reckon ratings could fall well below a million. It might have been a better idea to bury this forgettable show forever but since the Daily Star, which relies on Big Bore for most of its news in the summer, owns Channel 5 I can see why it's been revived.
IIRC it didn't have Nationwide reach when it first started. Has it now got 100% coverage with all the various means of reception. Maybe that had some effect on viewer numbers? Just a thought.
It's available for free on cable and satellite (as it has been since launch on cable and just after launch on satellite), but the key thing is it's available to everyone who has Freeview coverage. Their analogue terrestrial coverage is less than the other 4 channels, but that is becoming irrelevant as every month goes by as it will soon have the same analogue terrestrial coverage as the other 4 channels - 0%.
On the subject of why Channel 5's share is so poor - part of it is because of the fact that it's the 5th terrestrial channel (which I've never understood - how can I show get more viewers on BBC One than BBC Two? It's silly - surely a show is a show?) but it also doesn't have the same consistency of quality and/or popular programming as the other networks do.
Since I stopped watching The Gadget Show, I honestly can't think of the last time I watched Channel 5.
Five months of Big Borether could prove to be a poisoned chalice as viewers will get bored with it. I can foresee Channel 5 dropping it when the two year deal ends. I reckon ratings could fall well below a million. It might have been a better idea to bury this forgettable show forever but since the Daily Star, which relies on Big Bore for most of its news in the summer, owns Channel 5 I can see why it's been revived.
It's available for free on cable and satellite (as it has been since launch on cable and just after launch on satellite), but the key thing is it's available to everyone who has Freeview coverage. Their analogue terrestrial coverage is less than the other 4 channels, but that is becoming irrelevant as every month goes by as it will soon have the same analogue terrestrial coverage as the other 4 channels - 0%.
On the subject of why Channel 5's share is so poor - part of it is because of the fact that it's the 5th terrestrial channel (which I've never understood - how can I show get more viewers on BBC One than BBC Two? It's silly - surely a show is a show?) but it also doesn't have the same consistency of quality and/or popular programming as the other networks do.
Since I stopped watching The Gadget Show, I honestly can't think of the last time I watched Channel 5.
What was the coverage when it first launched. That was the point I was making. Did it's xx% coverage affect it getting a larger audience and does that still carry over now, even if people can get it now.
They have a DOG, IPPs, credit squeezes and they split films with the news.
Why does a DOG or IPP really bother you? It doesn't have any effect on me. Also, they're not the only one of the main five channels to do IPPs or credit squeezes. As for splitting films with the news, that's a bit harsh considering their late evening news bulletins are only about 5 minutes long if that. At least its better than what ITV used to do when they split films with an entire half-hour long news bulletin including the regional news.
One of many examples. This is probably the worst of the lot, along with the jumping kangaroo one. American broadcasts have these as well. Might as well watch at US pace than on Five.
TV stations around the world do this sort of thing, not just the US. I think just like with the DOG issue, its just a case of Brits wanting to be different from the rest of the world just for the sake of it. The rest of the world has DOGs and IPPs therefore we mustn't.
Comments
This will be a very interesting test to see if there will be a major drop in viewers from when it was on C4 . Of course if they make too many changes that will affect the number of viewers and they must have Davina.
No way will it get that many.
Big Brother 11 was usually getting 2.2m-2.6m every night. That was an increase on Big Brother 10 though which had very bad ratings (i think it dipped to below 1m at one point), probably because it was the last ever series. How many of those viewers will stay with it to channel 5, and how many new people will even know about it when it returns, depends. I imagine 1m-1.5m, probably not much higher.
Never had any problem with the content- that I liked. ITV has just as much rubbish(for me) as Five. It's they way they went American in presenting the broadcasts. Surely a new channel needs to be building an audience, not driving away viewers?
I reckon 850k lowest
and... 1.91m highest!
TBH I meant about 2.5 million, about the same as they got on E4, if I remember rightly.
I think 250k was the live feed numbers.
American in what way?
No they don’t. They’re the home of the freakshow/Hitler/shark documentaries, they’re one of the few broadcasters that STILL pans and scans widescreen films and I don’t call wall-to-wall CSI to be anything other than lazy, wallpaper drama scheduling. To put the icing on the cake when they do get great shows like Breaking Bad or Justified they’re shoved, out of sight and stuffed with ads on FiveUSA (or whatever they’ll be calling it next month) and even rushed out five nights a week post-midnight at Xmas as BB was.
This is a channel that thinks following an ex-Big Brother contestant around or filming Eddie Stobart trucks up and down the motorway constitutes worthwhile television. They’re shitpeddlers to the underclass. And they know it.
One of many examples. This is probably the worst of the lot, along with the jumping kangaroo one. American broadcasts have these as well. Might as well watch at US pace than on Five.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyAAojv-A5M
I read the final show got over 4 million but the last series averaged over 2 million. BB used to get around 8 million at its peak.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/showbiz/article-23736985-channel-4-to-axe-big-brother-after-11th-series-next-year.do
In fairness, that is particularly bad, though not as bad as the time it went out in a documentary about a train crash. But they only started doing that in 2008, and the whole issue of their programmes rating relatively worse than other terrestrial channels was present well before this.
What does everyone think about the axing of Live from Studio Five and the introduction of OK! TV?
It's available for free on cable and satellite (as it has been since launch on cable and just after launch on satellite), but the key thing is it's available to everyone who has Freeview coverage. Their analogue terrestrial coverage is less than the other 4 channels, but that is becoming irrelevant as every month goes by as it will soon have the same analogue terrestrial coverage as the other 4 channels - 0%.
On the subject of why Channel 5's share is so poor - part of it is because of the fact that it's the 5th terrestrial channel (which I've never understood - how can I show get more viewers on BBC One than BBC Two? It's silly - surely a show is a show?) but it also doesn't have the same consistency of quality and/or popular programming as the other networks do.
Since I stopped watching The Gadget Show, I honestly can't think of the last time I watched Channel 5.
I didn't know that :eek: I'm shocked
What was the coverage when it first launched. That was the point I was making. Did it's xx% coverage affect it getting a larger audience and does that still carry over now, even if people can get it now.
Like there’s any difference between the two......
Some interesting news here about any forthcoming BB
http://www.bbspy.co.uk/0331/news/c5/channel-5-about-to-sign-200m-big-brother-deal