I did post earlier that they have already renewed it for season 2.
The Good Wife always returns in January.
That is good to know, thanks.
As for The Good Wife, given that it is a quality show not always reflected in the ratings, it is always a relief to me to know that it has not been axed over here like some other US series tend to be if they do not deliver.
Corrie was always planned to be on Sunday. The BBC knew this as it was so blatantly obvious that to try and deny knowledge is completely stupid. Of course ITV are going to put the displaced Corries on Strictly launch night to boost their schedule.
Yet it didn't appear in the programme exchanges... funny that and of course the BBC aren't psychic, there was nothing stopping ITV airing double Corrie next Sunday. If ITV were so innocent they'd have put it in the first schedule exchange.:kitty:
2 Weddings,A rape,A life/Family changed forever,A return,And a shooting
That's more like it. EastEnders (Until Lucy's death at Easter) had Trailers made of clips
for too long but this is one they have made and it looks good.
2 Weddings,A rape,A life/Family changed forever,A return,And a shooting
That's more like it. EastEnders (Until Lucy's death at Easter) had Trailers made of clips
for too long but this is one they have made and it looks good.
It's easy to see the problem but harder to suggest solutions. Obviously make better shows but I'm interested if anyone thinks scheduling is genuinely a problem, and if so actually see some ideas/analysis.
Take last night for example. The audience for Whicher was aiming towards the same audience that were watching Strictly. Unfortunately it had a 15 minute overlap. I doubt many will watch to watch a drama when they've missed 1/4 of it, and with it being 2hrs long on a school night.
I would have either: cut the episode into two and schedule 1hr on Sunday at 9:15pm after an extended XF, with the following 1hr on Tuesday at 9pm.
Or saved Whicher for later in the year or next year and put something else in its place.
2hrs was way too long for a drama on Sunday on the 1st School night. The crossover with XF is also very minimal. A rpt of Benidorm would have more crossover.
Earlier this year they put Harry Potter back in the schedule and delayed the news late for a rpt!? For big events the news can move, but for a rpt, no.
The Zoo opposite Countryfile - both with similar crossover audience.
As for The Good Wife, given that it is a quality show not always reflected in the ratings, it is always a relief to me to know that it has not been axed over here like some other US series tend to be if they do not deliver.
The Good Wife is one of More4s top performers, makes a great pair with Nashville, I understand though having been burned before with OUAT and Scandal before its rescue.
I wouldn't be surprised if this turns out to be the last season of The Good Wife based on its US ratings but the emmy win may help keep it, if something else underperforms.
In the end, does it really matter where strictly or x-factor landed up for a single episode out of a 14 episode (or whatever) run. Both still managed to hit high overnights which will undoubtedly increase once catch-up is factored in. A single match-up is not going to have any influence in the long term survival of either programme.
The BBC knew that Corrie would be in that slot (it was obvious) and used this as an excuse to set up a direct clash with a fragile X Factor. They knew exactly what they were doing.
I wouldn't describe Factor as fragile. Weakened, yes, by three years of bad decisions behind the scenes, but not fragile. You make it sound like a piece of delicate porcelain deliberately placed under a fat man's cushion, just before he sits down for a pie.
Ego and complacency are the causes of Factor's decline, not one full clash with one Strictly edition.
Don't know about D.M.N. but I don't have that info, but I can tell you that the overnight for it was 1.16m (0.96m exc +1). Not sure if D.M.N.'s official includes +1 or not.
This may, or may not, surprise people but a lot more people watch The X Factor live than The Great British Bake Off. Although the live ratings do make for amusing reading: on one day Pointless beat EastEnders due to a clash with Emmerdale.
X Factor was only an hour long, so the nine-minute clash was almost one-sixth of the running time. Somewhat significant, I wouldn't put it stronger than that.
Without Strictly airing, what would ITV have averaged in the 20:00 quarter-hour? 8m? In which case Factor's average was dented by about 0.4m. If it would have been 7.5m in that quarter-hour, then the dent across the whole average would have been 0.3m.
Could work, as ITV are going to look weak when the ECL goes next year and the current Tuesday line up on non football nights is too weak. However, an extra Coronation St episode might be a bit much, maybe ditch the weakest one of the lost, Friday 8.30.
Damn, I miscounted the Coronation Street episodes. Yes, I agree, the second Friday episode can be dropped with maybe two hour dramas airing there.
They had no choice, Saturday full. Recorded Wednesday spoilers and leaks coming out it had yo be shown, Corrie and. SCD have similar viewers XF is far younger appeal to the target teenagers group and on the wane now. ( ratings prove that)
It could have aired 5.45 - 7.00 to avoid Coronation Street.
It could have aired tonight opposite the football (The One Show could have been a 15 minute pre-recorded Strictly Special, EastEnders could have aired at 19.15 to pick up Emmerdale viewers, Strictly airing 19.45 - 21.00 followed by New Tricks. The One Show could have been cut to 30 minutes on Wednesday to incorporate Inside Out or Panorama - The Great British Bake Off can self evidently self start - and Would I Lie To You? could have been held back a week for the other with A Question of Sport moved to 8.30pm.)
It could have aired opposite Coronation Street.
It could have aired at 3.05 in the morning (:p).
There were options to the BBC. They didn't HAVE to air it there. They chose to.
Yet it didn't appear in the programme exchanges... funny that and of course the BBC aren't psychic, there was nothing stopping ITV airing double Corrie next Sunday. If ITV were so innocent they'd have put it in the first schedule exchange.:kitty:
ITV should have scheduled Coronation Street in the provisionals and I have no idea why they didn't. Did they fear it'd result in Strictly moving to 8pm and didn't want the BBC to plan ahead? It was silly, whatever happened.
I agree. I thougt it was very good and there is definately something there between the new characters - some good humour too. It might not be as good as the old days but comparing it to other dramas its still OK for me.
X Factor was only an hour long, so the nine-minute clash was almost one-sixth of the running time. Somewhat significant, I wouldn't put it stronger than that.
Without Strictly airing, what would ITV have averaged in the 20:00 quarter-hour? 8m? In which case Factor's average was dented by about 0.4m.
Unlikely to have been as high as 8m given that X Factor normally gets off to a fairly slow start before building across the first 15-30 mins, as evidenced by the jump at 8.30pm. 7.5m or possibly even slightly lower seems more likely to me, so a dent of 0.26m or less.
I wouldn't describe Factor as fragile. Weakened, yes, by three years of bad decisions behind the scenes, but not fragile. You make it sound like a piece of delicate porcelain deliberately placed under a fat man's cushion, just before he sits down for a pie.
Ego and complacency are the causes of Factor's decline, not one full clash with one Strictly edition.
The fact that the ratings for it are all over the place at the moment with no indication of whether it will eventually rise, fall or settle suggests to me it is fragile.
Let me make myself clear (as people seem to be defending the BBC like I've just attacked one of their family members). The BBC were playing dirty so to speak imo and wanted an X Factor clash. However I don't blame them. They are perfectly entitled to do so. As are ITV when it comes to Emmerdale and EE. The fact that some people seem to refuse to believe that the BBC would ever go down to ITV's level by playing scheduling tricks just gets on my nerves. Open your eyes.
X Factor was only an hour long, so the nine-minute clash was almost one-sixth of the running time. Somewhat significant, I wouldn't put it stronger than that.
Without Strictly airing, what would ITV have averaged in the 20:00 quarter-hour? 8m? In which case Factor's average was dented by about 0.4m. If it would have been 7.5m in that quarter-hour, then the dent across the whole average would have been 0.3m.
To add to this, just found the breakdown for the previous week:
2000 8.34
2015 8.88
2030 9.49
2045 9.58
2100 9.61
That week the first quarter hour was 6.08% below the second. If that pattern had been repeated in week 2 we'd have been looking at 7.64m for the first quarter hour, so a 0.30m dent. However, looking at the 5 minute breakdown there was no advert break in the 2000-2015 segment in week 1 but there was in the 2015-2030 show. That was an 80 minute show though and in the following week's 60 minute show there most likely would have been a break in the 2010-2015 segment, suggesting that the rating would have been less than 7.64m for the quarter hour and the dent less than 0.3m.
I realise that response was probably a bit much for a very minor issue, but oh well...
Over the last two months I've drifted back to watching a few programmes on CH4, after a boycott of their channels following their endless exploitative programmes.
And now they are at it again.
CH4, tabloid telly. Jay Hunt is like a Conservative minister for community relations....
Thanks. The live figure will include live guests. That timeshift looks very high.
31/08 - 20:00 - 6.27m (32.1%) / 9.53m (37.6%)
The overnight for last Sunday's X Factor was 8.20m (34.9%), so an increase of +1.33m (+16.2%).
Last Saturday's went from 9.49m (43.0%) to 10.65m (43.6%), an increase of +1.16m (+12.2%).
Same-night timeshift was approx 1.9m for both.
This may, or may not, surprise people but a lot more people watch The X Factor live than The Great British Bake Off. Although the live ratings do make for amusing reading: on one day Pointless beat EastEnders due to a clash with Emmerdale.
22 July? 2.72m live audience for EastEnders that evening according to BARB. Scary, although it did consolidate over 5m.
He's a multi-millionaire who clearly can't believe his luck and loves every minute of his job with no idea who we are - we're writing about him on an internet forum. I'm sure he's still gloating!
And the auditions are supposed to be the strongest weeks of the format.
Not necessarily, growth in the lives has been more common than not. If they get the right acts and the scheduling Gods are on side then it could grow. In any event, the Saturday ratings have been very good. Interesting to see next Sundays numbers.
Of course it doesn't. Aren't about half of Strictly's viewers over 50? I don't understand the ratings war. They're different shows with different demographics.
About half are over 60, Twitter doesn't mean much at all.
With the new US TV season fast approaching Fox launched their new reality show Utopia, which is basically a big brother outdoors trying to create a new society and filmed for a year...
It debuted to a lacklustre 1.9 in the demo (I'll save calling it a disaster until next week), following Football which scored a 4.1. They plan to air this twice a week, but I really can't see this lasting long as it is only going to fall hard in the coming weeks, thats before the rest of the networks actually start trying!
This is going to be one very hard (but predictable) flop!
Not surprised, really. Utopia never really caught on with international buyers despite John De Mol's backing and it seemed like FOX bit too soon off the back of those Dutch ratings, his name and their need for a big tentpole reality series to replace X/Idol. They had money in the pot without X Factor but at $50m (for just 20 hours apparently), this is a costly mistake which will likely leave them with lower ratings. Can see this dropping to mid 1's on Tuesday and potentially a lot lower in the short term future. Will need to watch it but the reviews don't seem to be great.
Why do they count +1 in the peaks? I always thought a 'peak' figure should show the total no. of viewers watching the show at one time (e.g 9.4 tuned in to watch Strictly at one point).
The Strictly peak figure doesn't show that either - people might have been watching at 9.30pm, 10.45pm or 1am. All overnights include same day timeshift and (I believe?) same day use of VOD. We rarely get to see genuinely "live" ratings.
For X Factor the 5 minute peak looks a lot better than the 15's as well because they're a closer reflection of how many people are watching the show itself rather than the show and 4 minutes of adverts as you get with the 15's.
Love Productions and Channel 4 in controversial documentary shocker! ;-) They thrive on this kind of stuff really. Providing it doesn't become impossible to make the show, the scandal could work for them.
The fact that the ratings for it are all over the place at the moment with no indication of whether it will eventually rise, fall or settle suggests to me it is fragile.
Let me make myself clear (as people seem to be defending the BBC like I've just attacked one of their family members). The BBC were playing dirty so to speak imo and wanted an X Factor clash. However I don't blame them. They are perfectly entitled to do so. As are ITV when it comes to Emmerdale and EE. The fact that some people seem to refuse to believe that the BBC would ever go down to ITV's level by playing scheduling tricks just gets on my nerves. Open your eyes.
I can actually think of very few times when BBC could be accused of this but dozens and dozens of times when ITV do. So pretending they both do it as much as one another is not right if for no other reason than BBC scheduling is generally very poor.
But I agree that they have the right and should do it more in direct response to ITV and if this is the start of such then great.
Although only last week some posters reckoned that BBC should not put any decent rated programs on opposite ITV big hitters as it wasnt fair to damage their income in that way.
Comments
That is good to know, thanks.
As for The Good Wife, given that it is a quality show not always reflected in the ratings, it is always a relief to me to know that it has not been axed over here like some other US series tend to be if they do not deliver.
Yet it didn't appear in the programme exchanges... funny that and of course the BBC aren't psychic, there was nothing stopping ITV airing double Corrie next Sunday. If ITV were so innocent they'd have put it in the first schedule exchange.:kitty:
https://twitter.com/bbceastenders
That's more like it. EastEnders (Until Lucy's death at Easter) had Trailers made of clips
for too long but this is one they have made and it looks good.
Wow sounds exciting.
The Guardian on why C4's latest ratings chasing title Immigration Street should not be made: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/08/derby-road-benefits-street-channel-4-debate-immigration
Take last night for example. The audience for Whicher was aiming towards the same audience that were watching Strictly. Unfortunately it had a 15 minute overlap. I doubt many will watch to watch a drama when they've missed 1/4 of it, and with it being 2hrs long on a school night.
I would have either: cut the episode into two and schedule 1hr on Sunday at 9:15pm after an extended XF, with the following 1hr on Tuesday at 9pm.
Or saved Whicher for later in the year or next year and put something else in its place.
2hrs was way too long for a drama on Sunday on the 1st School night. The crossover with XF is also very minimal. A rpt of Benidorm would have more crossover.
Earlier this year they put Harry Potter back in the schedule and delayed the news late for a rpt!? For big events the news can move, but for a rpt, no.
The Zoo opposite Countryfile - both with similar crossover audience.
The Good Wife is one of More4s top performers, makes a great pair with Nashville, I understand though having been burned before with OUAT and Scandal before its rescue.
I wouldn't be surprised if this turns out to be the last season of The Good Wife based on its US ratings but the emmy win may help keep it, if something else underperforms.
Ego and complacency are the causes of Factor's decline, not one full clash with one Strictly edition.
It's the best episode this series so far
It includes +1. So far - live / consolidated:
30/08 - 20:00 - 7.63m (39.4%) / 10.65m (43.6%)
31/08 - 15:10 - 857k (9.0%) / 1.50m (13.7%)
....
31/08 - 20:00 - 6.27m (32.1%) / 9.53m (37.6%)
This may, or may not, surprise people but a lot more people watch The X Factor live than The Great British Bake Off. Although the live ratings do make for amusing reading: on one day Pointless beat EastEnders due to a clash with Emmerdale.
X Factor was only an hour long, so the nine-minute clash was almost one-sixth of the running time. Somewhat significant, I wouldn't put it stronger than that.
Saturday 7 September 2013
18:52-20:08 - Strictly: 8.43m (41.3%)
19:59-20:59 - TXF: 7.94m (36.3%) / 8.30m (37.9%)
Breakdown (courtesy Mike TeeVee):
Without Strictly airing, what would ITV have averaged in the 20:00 quarter-hour? 8m? In which case Factor's average was dented by about 0.4m. If it would have been 7.5m in that quarter-hour, then the dent across the whole average would have been 0.3m.
Damn, I miscounted the Coronation Street episodes. Yes, I agree, the second Friday episode can be dropped with maybe two hour dramas airing there.
It could have aired 5.45 - 7.00 to avoid Coronation Street.
It could have aired tonight opposite the football (The One Show could have been a 15 minute pre-recorded Strictly Special, EastEnders could have aired at 19.15 to pick up Emmerdale viewers, Strictly airing 19.45 - 21.00 followed by New Tricks. The One Show could have been cut to 30 minutes on Wednesday to incorporate Inside Out or Panorama - The Great British Bake Off can self evidently self start - and Would I Lie To You? could have been held back a week for the other with A Question of Sport moved to 8.30pm.)
It could have aired opposite Coronation Street.
It could have aired at 3.05 in the morning (:p).
There were options to the BBC. They didn't HAVE to air it there. They chose to.
But...
ITV should have scheduled Coronation Street in the provisionals and I have no idea why they didn't. Did they fear it'd result in Strictly moving to 8pm and didn't want the BBC to plan ahead? It was silly, whatever happened.
I agree. I thougt it was very good and there is definately something there between the new characters - some good humour too. It might not be as good as the old days but comparing it to other dramas its still OK for me.
Unlikely to have been as high as 8m given that X Factor normally gets off to a fairly slow start before building across the first 15-30 mins, as evidenced by the jump at 8.30pm. 7.5m or possibly even slightly lower seems more likely to me, so a dent of 0.26m or less.
Sounds more like a Guy Ritchie film to me !!
The fact that the ratings for it are all over the place at the moment with no indication of whether it will eventually rise, fall or settle suggests to me it is fragile.
Let me make myself clear (as people seem to be defending the BBC like I've just attacked one of their family members). The BBC were playing dirty so to speak imo and wanted an X Factor clash. However I don't blame them. They are perfectly entitled to do so. As are ITV when it comes to Emmerdale and EE. The fact that some people seem to refuse to believe that the BBC would ever go down to ITV's level by playing scheduling tricks just gets on my nerves. Open your eyes.
To add to this, just found the breakdown for the previous week:
2000 8.34
2015 8.88
2030 9.49
2045 9.58
2100 9.61
That week the first quarter hour was 6.08% below the second. If that pattern had been repeated in week 2 we'd have been looking at 7.64m for the first quarter hour, so a 0.30m dent. However, looking at the 5 minute breakdown there was no advert break in the 2000-2015 segment in week 1 but there was in the 2015-2030 show. That was an 80 minute show though and in the following week's 60 minute show there most likely would have been a break in the 2010-2015 segment, suggesting that the rating would have been less than 7.64m for the quarter hour and the dent less than 0.3m.
I realise that response was probably a bit much for a very minor issue, but oh well...
Over the last two months I've drifted back to watching a few programmes on CH4, after a boycott of their channels following their endless exploitative programmes.
And now they are at it again.
CH4, tabloid telly. Jay Hunt is like a Conservative minister for community relations....
Thanks. The live figure will include live guests. That timeshift looks very high.
The overnight for last Sunday's X Factor was 8.20m (34.9%), so an increase of +1.33m (+16.2%).
Last Saturday's went from 9.49m (43.0%) to 10.65m (43.6%), an increase of +1.16m (+12.2%).
Same-night timeshift was approx 1.9m for both.
22 July? 2.72m live audience for EastEnders that evening according to BARB. Scary, although it did consolidate over 5m.
He's a multi-millionaire who clearly can't believe his luck and loves every minute of his job with no idea who we are - we're writing about him on an internet forum. I'm sure he's still gloating!
Not necessarily, growth in the lives has been more common than not. If they get the right acts and the scheduling Gods are on side then it could grow. In any event, the Saturday ratings have been very good. Interesting to see next Sundays numbers.
About half are over 60, Twitter doesn't mean much at all.
Not surprised, really. Utopia never really caught on with international buyers despite John De Mol's backing and it seemed like FOX bit too soon off the back of those Dutch ratings, his name and their need for a big tentpole reality series to replace X/Idol. They had money in the pot without X Factor but at $50m (for just 20 hours apparently), this is a costly mistake which will likely leave them with lower ratings. Can see this dropping to mid 1's on Tuesday and potentially a lot lower in the short term future. Will need to watch it but the reviews don't seem to be great.
He was complaining in 2009 when X Factor was winning. It has been a pretty consistent message in that regard.
The Strictly peak figure doesn't show that either - people might have been watching at 9.30pm, 10.45pm or 1am. All overnights include same day timeshift and (I believe?) same day use of VOD. We rarely get to see genuinely "live" ratings.
For X Factor the 5 minute peak looks a lot better than the 15's as well because they're a closer reflection of how many people are watching the show itself rather than the show and 4 minutes of adverts as you get with the 15's.
Love Productions and Channel 4 in controversial documentary shocker! ;-) They thrive on this kind of stuff really. Providing it doesn't become impossible to make the show, the scandal could work for them.
It's nerdy and I like it!
So basically it was a small dent but one we should still take note of in the year-on-year comparisons.
I can actually think of very few times when BBC could be accused of this but dozens and dozens of times when ITV do. So pretending they both do it as much as one another is not right if for no other reason than BBC scheduling is generally very poor.
But I agree that they have the right and should do it more in direct response to ITV and if this is the start of such then great.
Although only last week some posters reckoned that BBC should not put any decent rated programs on opposite ITV big hitters as it wasnt fair to damage their income in that way.