In short regarding pretty much every show on TV: everything is down y-o-y due the amazing Summer we're experiencing. Simple as that. I'm fully expecting the soaps to return to normal levels shortly. This happens every year. Yes, this year has been particularly bad - but everything will start to creep back up. In all honesty, there's absolutely nothing to get excited about in terms of ratings atm. It's all rather boring.
But mlt11, given that the World Cup rights cost £55million and that's excluding the production costs, in reality Itv have spent less on their remainder of the schedule this year. Minus 530 by 55 which equals 475. That's already less than the 490 for the same period last year, and we've not even taken into account the production costs of the world cup which you have to subtract further.
In real terms, Itv's January to pre-World Cup schedule was down about 10-20million compared to the same period last year. That was evident by them airing fewer number of hours of dramas and top quality entertainment in their schedules.
I'm well aware of the World Cup.
However it's wrong to exclude it as it forms a substantial part of the schedule - without it more other programming would be required.
However even if (wrongly) you did exclude it your numbers still wouldn't be right because a significant part of the World Cup was in July and therefore outside the numbers quoted.
Excluding Sport as a whole:
ITV(1) programming cost was down £1m
ITV2/3/4 programming cost was up £4m
ITV Family programming cost was up £3m
Trying to ride Rising Star's coat tails. The Singer Takes It All might do well, 2m? Can't see it getting Gogglebox numbers. It will be facing Bake Off's spin off show next Friday I think.Can see that rating higher.
I couldn't quite work out that scheduling for the GBBO spinoff show. A two day gap and a different channel.
You could, but why would you? There's surely a bigger audience to be had for this elsewhere.
Hmmm... it seems to be excuse after excuse after excuse. Some of those reasons I accept but I am still a believer that the reduced weekly reach is having an impact on their ratings. Surely it is advantageous to have as high a weekly reach as possible to maximise the number of light tv viewers watching a certain tv program.
Suppose you have a weekly reach of 65pct and last there was a weekly reach of 70pct on average. Suppose last year a show was getting 3.5million. As the weekly reach in raw millions is down about 7pct, it is more likely that the same show this year will rate lower than 3.5million in the same slot against the same kind of opposition than rating the same or higher than last year. It's basic math, the smaller the pool of people you have to choose from, the harder it is to get the same number of viewers as previously when there was a bigger pool of viewers to choose from, therefore the more likelihood there is of your ratings being smaller.
The problem with Itv is they go through long spells of 'filler schedules' such as right now which means that although in the Autumn theyre strong, lots of people get out of the habit of tuning into the channel and inevitably that weekly reach goes down further and further. Did you see their weekly reach for the latest week on Barb? Only 56pct for Itv SD, barely a couple of share points ahead of the likes of C4 and BBC2! And almost 20pct weekly reach behind BBC One. It's shocking and surely surely that is resulting in reduced ratings.
I know reduced ratings result in reduced reach, but this is a syngerstic relationship. One affects the other and a reduced weekly reach can also result in reduced ratinngs. It's a very bad situation to be in when Itv are about 18pct behind BBC One in the weekly reaches.
You say it's excuse after excuse but surely the weekly reach crisis is just another excuse if you're using that logic? You asked why the ratings for those shows have declined and I gave you the reasons. Ratings don't just magically decline, there is always a reason. In some cases it is just viewers getting bored of the show but sometimes it's more complex than that. But ultimately I think if viewers want to watch a show they will and what channel it is on will not affect that. I will concede that maybe a decline in something like Corrie can have some small repercussions elsewhere on the schedule, particularly at a time like Smmer when there aren't really any other big shows on. But I certainly don't think this "weekly reach crisis" is anything to get worked up about nor do I think it is the reason behind the decline of individual programmes. There is more to it than that. No denting that the reach for that week is terrible (although you must also take HD and +1 into account) but they had a very quiet week that week with nothing standing out in the schedule. In a EE months time it will be different and I don't think that some reach crisis is causing ratings to decline as when there are appealing shows on the viewers will watch.
However it's wrong to exclude it as it forms a substantial part of the schedule - without it more other programming would be required.
However even if (wrongly) you did exclude it your numbers still wouldn't be right because a significant part of the World Cup was in July and therefore outside the numbers quoted.
Excluding Sport as a whole:
ITV(1) programming cost was down £1m
ITV2/3/4 programming cost was up £4m
ITV Family programming cost was up £3m
Interesting. So Itv spend has been broadly flat excluding the world cup. You wouldnt know that looking at their schedules which has been dominated by filler and repeats.
Interesting bit about the sport, last year they paid £81million for the first six months. Which pretty much the majority would've been FA Cup and Champions League. Let's say for the sake of argument about £70million is FA Cup and Champions League. In Jan to May 2016, they will save that much money which is HUGE. How much of that will be reinvested into top quality drama and entertainment? If they actually reinvested all £70million into drama theoretically [i know its not gonna happen as some will be in for Euro 2016], they would be looking at 100 more hours of drama for those six months. Even if you say Euro 2016 will cost them in terms of rights about £30million, that's still about £40million around to play with if they wanted to - a potential 60 hours more drama over six months!
In the webcast, someone asked Crozier how much will their reinvest into their schedule from the CL savings. He flat out refused to answer the question and went on to make some lame excuse about the rugby world cup balancing things out in 2015. But i think the fact he refused to answer the question straight out, implies that Itv wont reinvest much of that £70million saving into top non-sport content.
Interesting bit about the sport, last year they paid £81million for the first six months. Which pretty much the majority would've been FA Cup and Champions League. Let's say for the sake of argument about £70million is FA Cup and Champions League. In Jan to May 2016, they will save that much money which is HUGE. How much of that will be reinvested into top quality drama and entertainment? If they actually reinvested all £70million into drama theoretically [i know its not gonna happen as some will be in for Euro 2016], they would be looking at 100 more hours of drama for those six months. Even if you say Euro 2016 will cost them in terms of rights about £30million, that's still about £40million around to play with if they wanted to - a potential 60 hours more drama over six months!
In the webcast, someone asked Crozier how much will their reinvest into their schedule from the CL savings. He flat out refused to answer the question and went on to make some lame excuse about the rugby world cup balancing things out in 2015. But i think the fact he refused to answer the question straight out, implies that Itv wont reinvest much of that £70million saving into top non-sport content.
You could argue that the whole £70m is available as the Euro 2016 spending takes the place of the World Cup 2014 spending (and at a lower level, though also occupying less hours).
However whatever the detail of the numbers I would agree with you - a large part of the sport cost savings won't be reinvested in other programming - because it won't be profitable to do so - as at the incremental margin it becomes harder to make additional high rating drama / entertainment programming - and there is also the issue of diminishing returns when making additional programming of the same genre which they are already making lots of.
C5 confirms BB will continue beyond the original finale date of August 15- that night's episode will now be an eviction.
I reckon we're looking at a Sunday night final, the return of Under the Dome on the Monday and CBB launching on either the Wednesday or Thursday, with Wentworth Prison and Dallas returning the following week.
This just shows that C5 have no interest in ditching BB otherwise they would be trying to end this series asap.
Love Your Garden is simply a reworking of Titchmarsh's BBC series Ground Force but has not been so successful. How long will it take ITV to learn that simply importing BBC names is no guarantee of ratings success (Lynam, Chiles, Bleakley, Reid et al) it's the content that matters.
That isn't the case with Titchmarsh at all though is it, you only said it so you could mention Chiles and Bleakley again as you are obsessed by them.
ITV didn't poach him straight from Ground Force to do Love Your Garden.
He stopped doing Ground Force years ago, then later on started working for ITV doing a chat show and various documentaries, and then many years later, he started doing Love Your Garden.
Haven't seen the news yet but have read the "Boltgate" stories. Why are journalists asking such childish questions such as "What do you think of the games?" as if to hope to get a response like "Oh they're the best games I've ever been to!" I can just imagine the scenario: "What do you think of the CG?" "Yeah they're awesome!" "Do you thnk they're better than the Olympics?" "Well, these games are awesome, but if you compare them to the Olympics then they're shit! The Olympics were much better!" "So you think these games are shit?" "That's not what I said. I said these games are awesome but are incomparable to the Olympics". Journalist grins and says Bolt said the Games were shit when he didn't! I have heard a Scottish commentator actually try and get an English cyclist to say the crowd was better than they were at London 2012! Thankfully the cyclists response was: "Errrr.......the crowd here are so supportive, there's a great atmosphere here! There was huge support and a wall of sound in London too!"
I've just returned from Scotland (no tickets for any events mind) and its fair to say the city is buzzing, but it's also fair to say this isn't the Olympics, and whereas Team GB winning medals boosted ratings, the fact the home nations are winning everything at the CG is possibly denting ratings, as it loses the impact.
I've just returned from Scotland (no tickets for any events mind) and its fair to say the city is buzzing, but it's also fair to say this isn't the Olympics, and whereas Team GB winning medals boosted ratings, the fact the home nations are winning everything at the CG is possibly denting ratings, as it loses the impact.
I think that's the flaw in the CG. It is flatly unpatriotic. It is genuinely exciting when team GB win Gold by winning against the Americans, Russians and so on. It feels like a great achievement. Whilst the CG gives home nation athletes experience, having a final with England vs. England is less appealing.
It's fair to say the Tumble advert is slick and polished and is on high rotation, but the best bit is when the camera pans across the "big names" and I can barely place more than one or two of them.
I couldn't quite work out that scheduling for the GBBO spinoff show. A two day gap and a different channel.
You could, but why would you? There's surely a bigger audience to be had for this elsewhere.
Genuinely baffling scheduling, I had to do a double take, unless the apprentice is following soon after Bake Off and they don't want effectively the same show taking up the 9 and 10pm slots on Two?
It's fair to say the Tumble advert is slick and polished and is on high rotation, but the best bit is when the camera pans across the "big names" and I can barely place more than one or two of them.
It is a good trailer. But like yourself, I'm thinking "Who the hell are they?"
Genuinely baffling scheduling, I had to do a double take, unless the apprentice is following soon after Bake Off and they don't want effectively the same show taking up the 9 and 10pm slots on Two?
I think you could be right and this will be why the spin off has been moved to Fridays. I don't know if it needs it actually. The ratings will tell the story but the format doesn't need stretched.
The trail for "Tumble" looks suspiciously like a "Dancing On Ice" one. They always used to recruit absolute has been and who the hell are they z list in Lycra too. I'd say this show is quite a copycat of the "Dancing on Ice" format.
I think you could be right and this will be why the spin off has been moved to Fridays. I don't know if it needs it actually. The ratings will tell the story but the format doesn't need stretched.
The trail for "Tumble" looks suspiciously like a "Dancing On Ice" one. They always used to recruit absolute has been and who the hell are they z list in Lycra too. I'd say this show is quite a copycat of the "Dancing on Ice" format.
Johnny, I seem to recall that you were writing "Tumble" off as soon as it was announced last year. In due respect, there is no way it is a copycat of Dancing On Ice. For one start, the contestants have to learn gymnastic skills and not "dance on ice". Why don't we all wait to see what it's like before it gets written off! I suspect many already written their draft posts proclaiming it as awful even before it's been on. You could argue that everything copies everything anyway. One show inspires another. It always has done! I remember in the 1980's the BBC showed "Little and Large" whilst at the same time ITV showed "Cannon and Ball". Virtually identical formats but with different personalities. Nothing has changed in reality.
Johnny, I seem to recall that you were writing "Tumble" off as soon as it was announced last year. In due respect, there is no way it is a copycat of Dancing On Ice. For one start, the contestants have to learn gymnastic skills and not "dance on ice". Why don't we all wait to see what it's like before it gets written off! I suspect many already written their draft posts proclaiming it as awful even before it's been on. You could argue that everything copies everything anyway. One show inspires another. It always has done! I remember in the 1980's the BBC showed "Little and Large" whilst at the same time ITV showed "Cannon and Ball". Virtually identical formats but with different personalities. Nothing has changed in reality.
Mark Linsey commissioned it though and he hasn't launched any successful formulas.
Genuinely baffling scheduling, I had to do a double take, unless the apprentice is following soon after Bake Off and they don't want effectively the same show taking up the 9 and 10pm slots on Two?
I think you could be right and this will be why the spin off has been moved to Fridays. I don't know if it needs it actually. The ratings will tell the story but the format doesn't need stretched.
.
Part of the format of Extra Slice is that
from the Radio Times
members of the studio audience are..... challenged to bring in a cake inspired by this week's baking theme.
So maybe that's the reason for the two day gap between the programmes - the audience have to watch the programme at home, then do their baking to take to the filming of the spin-off. (whereas with You're Fired, the audience can be shown the main show in the studio just before they film the spin-off, meaning YF can be filmed the day before BBC1 screens The Apprentice and thus, You're Fired is ready to go as soon as TA finishes).
Mark Linsey commissioned it though and he hasn't launched any successful formulas.
Well, let's see what happens. The trouble with social media is that people come onto forums and decide en masse that they don't like something. Often long before anything get's aired. When things aren't actually that bad, the social media army continue to deride which creates universal dislike. I think it's nigh on time people watched something with an open mind, think for themselves and judge it on merit honestly. There might actually be something worth watching then!
Take "That Puppet Game Show" for instance. Actually a really good idea on paper. Executed properly it could have been a good family show. Instead of focusing on the positives (and there were some) the social media army ripped it to shreds from the off. Nothing is looked at constructively. Look at another example, "Don't Scare The Hare". No. OK. I'll give you that one! That was the worst thing I'd ever seen on British television!
That isn't the case with Titchmarsh at all though is it, you only said it so you could mention Chiles and Bleakley again as you are obsessed by them.
ITV didn't poach him straight from Ground Force to do Love Your Garden.
He stopped doing Ground Force years ago, then later on started working for ITV doing a chat show and various documentaries, and then many years later, he started doing Love Your Garden.
Yes Alan signed an exclusivity deal with them for gardening, a chat show and books/merchandise I think.
It doesn't always, but yeah sometimes they do have to cut costs. It's worth remembering just how awful the Summer used to be years ago though. Wall to wall repeats and tat, so no different to what's being served up now. I don't necessarily think things are that much worse than they were years ago, but people always get their rose-tinted glasses out when making comparisons.
ITV have certainly had some bad summers over the last ten to fifteen years, but through the late 1980s and almost all the 1990s, they were very strong in summer with hardly any repeats. Most of the new programmes were not ITV's best silver, but they were still good and/or popular enough to wipe the ratings floor with almost everything on BBC1 in the summer.
Nowhere was it more apparent than on Saturday nights. ITV would have line up of new quizzes and other light entertainment from about 6pm to 9pm, sometimes with a drama afterwards, whereas BBC1 would have a few cartoons to start the evening, maybe some crappy American drama repeat (especially in the 1980s), then a ratty old Western or Carry On film, or a Columbo repeat, and, if you were really lucky, a single new entertainment programme of anywhere between 30 and 50 minutes, either before or after the film. Then news, then another crap film.
When Channel 5 and digital telly came along within eighteen months of each other, the wheels of the ITV wagon started to become loose pretty quickly. Now they seem to be in a position where two of the wheels have fallen off, and every time they tap one of the two back on, one flies off the other side.
Mark Linsey commissioned it though and he hasn't launched any successful formulas.
Well law of averages says at least one should work Its a blatant attempt to ape how they found Strictly, a short summer series of a glitzy sport hoping it sticks. However, watching the gymnastics today showed me it might work, British Gymnastics is in rude health and they're fully supporting the show and it definitely has entertainment value as a sport, plus ITV are gifting them an.initial audience- I wouldn't be surprised if it takes off at all-Interesting to see what tone they aim for though, as if its too po faced it risks the same fate as Splash but if its too light hearted and everybodys rubbish it could be a car crash so its striking a balance I guess
So reach for the main channel is down 1.8% weekly and about 1% monthly. Although looking at the raw numbers (link below), it seems the TV universe has grown so monthly reach is down only 0.1m.
Overall, weekly TV reach is down 1% (94.5% to 93.5%), monthly reach is down 0.5% (98.7% to 98.2%) and quarterly reach is down 0.1% from 99.5% to 99.4%. Although again, it seems the universe has increased so the raw numbers are up across all measures.
It's hard to be precise across the 3 itv channels but it certainly doesn't scream "weekly reach crisis". In the long run, a sustained drop in reach could have an impact. But itv still seems very much able to pull in audiences for big shows, the problem is just that they've had less of them this year.
As for the CL and FA Cup money, they'll never be able to replace that ad revenue so any programming investment will be in accordance with that income. Hence the interest in commissioning male driven series. And not everything is measured in "hours of drama", especially as that drama would likely be appealing to the same audiences well catered to anyway (and thus already being sold to advertisers).
In short regarding pretty much every show on TV: everything is down y-o-y due the amazing Summer we're experiencing. Simple as that. I'm fully expecting the soaps to return to normal levels shortly. This happens every year. Yes, this year has been particularly bad - but everything will start to creep back up. In all honesty, there's absolutely nothing to get excited about in terms of ratings atm. It's all rather boring.
Met office in the paper this morning reports this is one of the hottest and sunniest July's on record.
So shouldn't be a suprise to anyone that rating are down, well anyone except this thread of course.
Comments
I'm well aware of the World Cup.
However it's wrong to exclude it as it forms a substantial part of the schedule - without it more other programming would be required.
However even if (wrongly) you did exclude it your numbers still wouldn't be right because a significant part of the World Cup was in July and therefore outside the numbers quoted.
Excluding Sport as a whole:
ITV(1) programming cost was down £1m
ITV2/3/4 programming cost was up £4m
ITV Family programming cost was up £3m
See slide 35:
http://www.itvplc.com/sites/itvplc/files/Interim%20presentation%202014.pdf
You could, but why would you? There's surely a bigger audience to be had for this elsewhere.
You say it's excuse after excuse but surely the weekly reach crisis is just another excuse if you're using that logic? You asked why the ratings for those shows have declined and I gave you the reasons. Ratings don't just magically decline, there is always a reason. In some cases it is just viewers getting bored of the show but sometimes it's more complex than that. But ultimately I think if viewers want to watch a show they will and what channel it is on will not affect that. I will concede that maybe a decline in something like Corrie can have some small repercussions elsewhere on the schedule, particularly at a time like Smmer when there aren't really any other big shows on. But I certainly don't think this "weekly reach crisis" is anything to get worked up about nor do I think it is the reason behind the decline of individual programmes. There is more to it than that. No denting that the reach for that week is terrible (although you must also take HD and +1 into account) but they had a very quiet week that week with nothing standing out in the schedule. In a EE months time it will be different and I don't think that some reach crisis is causing ratings to decline as when there are appealing shows on the viewers will watch.
Interesting bit about the sport, last year they paid £81million for the first six months. Which pretty much the majority would've been FA Cup and Champions League. Let's say for the sake of argument about £70million is FA Cup and Champions League. In Jan to May 2016, they will save that much money which is HUGE. How much of that will be reinvested into top quality drama and entertainment? If they actually reinvested all £70million into drama theoretically [i know its not gonna happen as some will be in for Euro 2016], they would be looking at 100 more hours of drama for those six months. Even if you say Euro 2016 will cost them in terms of rights about £30million, that's still about £40million around to play with if they wanted to - a potential 60 hours more drama over six months!
In the webcast, someone asked Crozier how much will their reinvest into their schedule from the CL savings. He flat out refused to answer the question and went on to make some lame excuse about the rugby world cup balancing things out in 2015. But i think the fact he refused to answer the question straight out, implies that Itv wont reinvest much of that £70million saving into top non-sport content.
It's also completely crap at the moment.
You could argue that the whole £70m is available as the Euro 2016 spending takes the place of the World Cup 2014 spending (and at a lower level, though also occupying less hours).
However whatever the detail of the numbers I would agree with you - a large part of the sport cost savings won't be reinvested in other programming - because it won't be profitable to do so - as at the incremental margin it becomes harder to make additional high rating drama / entertainment programming - and there is also the issue of diminishing returns when making additional programming of the same genre which they are already making lots of.
This just shows that C5 have no interest in ditching BB otherwise they would be trying to end this series asap.
That isn't the case with Titchmarsh at all though is it, you only said it so you could mention Chiles and Bleakley again as you are obsessed by them.
ITV didn't poach him straight from Ground Force to do Love Your Garden.
He stopped doing Ground Force years ago, then later on started working for ITV doing a chat show and various documentaries, and then many years later, he started doing Love Your Garden.
I think that's the flaw in the CG. It is flatly unpatriotic. It is genuinely exciting when team GB win Gold by winning against the Americans, Russians and so on. It feels like a great achievement. Whilst the CG gives home nation athletes experience, having a final with England vs. England is less appealing.
Genuinely baffling scheduling, I had to do a double take, unless the apprentice is following soon after Bake Off and they don't want effectively the same show taking up the 9 and 10pm slots on Two?
It is a good trailer. But like yourself, I'm thinking "Who the hell are they?"
I think you could be right and this will be why the spin off has been moved to Fridays. I don't know if it needs it actually. The ratings will tell the story but the format doesn't need stretched.
The trail for "Tumble" looks suspiciously like a "Dancing On Ice" one. They always used to recruit absolute has been and who the hell are they z list in Lycra too. I'd say this show is quite a copycat of the "Dancing on Ice" format.
Johnny, I seem to recall that you were writing "Tumble" off as soon as it was announced last year. In due respect, there is no way it is a copycat of Dancing On Ice. For one start, the contestants have to learn gymnastic skills and not "dance on ice". Why don't we all wait to see what it's like before it gets written off! I suspect many already written their draft posts proclaiming it as awful even before it's been on. You could argue that everything copies everything anyway. One show inspires another. It always has done! I remember in the 1980's the BBC showed "Little and Large" whilst at the same time ITV showed "Cannon and Ball". Virtually identical formats but with different personalities. Nothing has changed in reality.
Mark Linsey commissioned it though and he hasn't launched any successful formulas.
It is on a different channel because it's quite clearly intended as a bit of compensation for BBC2 for losing the main show to BBC1.
Part of the format of Extra Slice is that
from the Radio Times So maybe that's the reason for the two day gap between the programmes - the audience have to watch the programme at home, then do their baking to take to the filming of the spin-off. (whereas with You're Fired, the audience can be shown the main show in the studio just before they film the spin-off, meaning YF can be filmed the day before BBC1 screens The Apprentice and thus, You're Fired is ready to go as soon as TA finishes).
I said "maybe".
Well, let's see what happens. The trouble with social media is that people come onto forums and decide en masse that they don't like something. Often long before anything get's aired. When things aren't actually that bad, the social media army continue to deride which creates universal dislike. I think it's nigh on time people watched something with an open mind, think for themselves and judge it on merit honestly. There might actually be something worth watching then!
Take "That Puppet Game Show" for instance. Actually a really good idea on paper. Executed properly it could have been a good family show. Instead of focusing on the positives (and there were some) the social media army ripped it to shreds from the off. Nothing is looked at constructively. Look at another example, "Don't Scare The Hare". No. OK. I'll give you that one! That was the worst thing I'd ever seen on British television!
Yes Alan signed an exclusivity deal with them for gardening, a chat show and books/merchandise I think.
Nowhere was it more apparent than on Saturday nights. ITV would have line up of new quizzes and other light entertainment from about 6pm to 9pm, sometimes with a drama afterwards, whereas BBC1 would have a few cartoons to start the evening, maybe some crappy American drama repeat (especially in the 1980s), then a ratty old Western or Carry On film, or a Columbo repeat, and, if you were really lucky, a single new entertainment programme of anywhere between 30 and 50 minutes, either before or after the film. Then news, then another crap film.
When Channel 5 and digital telly came along within eighteen months of each other, the wheels of the ITV wagon started to become loose pretty quickly. Now they seem to be in a position where two of the wheels have fallen off, and every time they tap one of the two back on, one flies off the other side.
Well law of averages says at least one should work
http://www.barb.co.uk/trendspotting/data/quarterly-channel-reach?_s=4
ITV 2014 (2013)
Weekly: 65.2%, (67.0%)
Monthly: 85.5%, (86.6%)
Quarterly: 94.9% (95.3%)
So reach for the main channel is down 1.8% weekly and about 1% monthly. Although looking at the raw numbers (link below), it seems the TV universe has grown so monthly reach is down only 0.1m.
ITV HD 2014 (2013)
Weekly: 12.7% (9.9%)
Monthly: 21.5% (17.3%)
Quarterly: 30.7% (25.5%)
ITV +1 2014 (2013)
Weekly: 18.3% (16.7%)
Monthly: 38.3% (40.7%)
Quarterly: 59.3% (61.4%)
Overall, weekly TV reach is down 1% (94.5% to 93.5%), monthly reach is down 0.5% (98.7% to 98.2%) and quarterly reach is down 0.1% from 99.5% to 99.4%. Although again, it seems the universe has increased so the raw numbers are up across all measures.
It's hard to be precise across the 3 itv channels but it certainly doesn't scream "weekly reach crisis". In the long run, a sustained drop in reach could have an impact. But itv still seems very much able to pull in audiences for big shows, the problem is just that they've had less of them this year.
As for the CL and FA Cup money, they'll never be able to replace that ad revenue so any programming investment will be in accordance with that income. Hence the interest in commissioning male driven series. And not everything is measured in "hours of drama", especially as that drama would likely be appealing to the same audiences well catered to anyway (and thus already being sold to advertisers).
Met office in the paper this morning reports this is one of the hottest and sunniest July's on record.
So shouldn't be a suprise to anyone that rating are down, well anyone except this thread of course.