|
||||||||
Ratings Thread (Part 4) |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#2001 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 29,512
|
It's an interesting point - who has won more times in the clashes - The X Factor or Strictly?
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2002 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 10,940
|
Quote:
My predictions from the Ratings Prediction Game:
Pizza knows best! ![]() Last night's ratings show there's plenty of room for both talent shows on Saturday nights, and, as I predicted, both shows did well, with The X Factor coming out on top in the... ...forty-first... ...clash between the two shows. ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
#2003 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 30,110
|
Quote:
Could it be that the reason advertisers put so much emphasism on the 16-34 year old audience is because everyone who works in advertising is aged between 16 and 34 and they live in some strange "Logan's Run" type world where everyone over 40 is considered a geriatric?
Quote:
Why all this focus on 18-34 and 18-49 year olds! It’s the people over 50 who have all the money. Why be ageist? http://tvbythenumbers.com/numbers-102
I know it is counterintuitive for some people, but the focus on the younger age demographics isn’t a function of spending power or ageism, it’s a function of relative availability. It’s much, much easier to reach a 60 year old than a 25 year old via television advertising because on average a higher percentage of 60 year olds watch a higher percentage of television than 25 year olds. Relatively speaking, the 60 year old is easy to reach and the 25 year old far more scarce. It is the relative scarcity of younger viewers which drives the advertising focus and premiums paid for younger viewers. Whether this is good, bad, right or wrong, I can’t really say. I can say, at least for now, that’s the way it is. It’s really not about how old you are or how much money you have to spend. It’s about how easy it is to reach you. The easier it is to reach you, the less advertisers are willing to pay for you, the harder it is to reach you, the more they are willing to pay. |
|
|
|
|
#2004 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 50,506
|
SCD vs TXF - less of a battle, more a park walk for the latter. Hopefully ITV will be content with that result as it's still excellent, provides a load of free (positive) publicity, and no doubt it'll be back over 10m tonight with the BBC chasing an entirely different audience.
Elsewhere from the two reality giants, The Cube is standing out as a very solid performer and continues to be consistent despite the earlier slot and tougher competition. I think we're going to be seeing a lot more of this show over the next few years. Last night's instalment was terrific as well so it deserves it. Casino Royale meanwhile was wasted in the slot it was in last night. But with a 9pm slot essential due to content and News at Ten clogging up weeknights, this was the only real option. They could have made room tonight perhaps but I doubt it would have made that much of a difference, with the benefits of starting 15 minutes earlier soon countered by the fact that it's a work night and viewers would be less likely to stay up late to watch the end. It has to be said a really poor night for Ch4 and Five although the film on Ch4 performed somewhat better than the E.R. repeats of late. Shame no Sky3 figures have emerged yet but I suspect the usual sources like MG and Broadcast might publish some on Monday. I'm genuinely quite interested to know how the likes of I Am Legend and the Guiness Premiership rugby match performed free-to-air. |
|
|
|
|
#2005 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: The Middle of Nowhere
Posts: 7,265
|
I wouldn't really call 5.1m for Casino Royale "low", but bare in mind that unlike previous Bond films that have been shown first on ITV, Casino Royale has been shown to death on Sky Movies before ITV got the rights, therefore it's safe to assume that most viewers that the film appeals to will already have seen it recently on Sky or DVD/Blu Ray. Regardless though, surely ITV can see that sticking a stupid news programme in the middle of a film loses them viewers, 1.1m turned off while the news was on!
Also, the deal that netted ITV first run rights to the Bond films expired with Die Another Day, hence why Casino Royale was on Sky first. The same thing will happen with Quantum of Solace as per the deal with Sony, so don't expect to see QoS on ITV anytime before 2011 at the earliest. It'll probably be on Sky this Christmas though. |
|
|
|
|
#2006 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,541
|
Quote:
Why haven't the BBC been emphasising this numeric fact to shut up everyone, especially thick, ignorant, bandwagon-jumping politicans, who's been going on about this clash?
![]() ![]() I knew there had been plenty of clashes in the past, but even I was surprised there had been 40 of them before last night! Just goes to show, it was just the press and ITV making a mountain out of a molehill for cynical reasons. |
|
|
|
|
#2007 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London
Posts: 9,020
|
Quote:
ITV made an effort with some terrible drama last year that failed miserably. But they simply seem unable to do anything but crime drama which doesn't do well among younger viewers. And sitcoms are very popular with young viewers as well but again, they seem incapable of doing them either. Channel 4 seem to do very well. And E4 beat Five among 16-34's in the last 6 months last year.
Now ITV are giving an X Factor lead-in to Doc Martin. True, it is one of their few big drama hits that isn't based on police or murder. But it's not exactly Scrubs or Greys Anatomy. Thanks, that's interesting. Men definitely seem to command a premium as well, particularly young men. (I suppose most advertisers would rather pay the big sums for football than have to advertise on porn websites!). I imagine The Gadget Show which has a loyal audience of over 1m makes more money than say Brighton Beach Patrol because it skews more male and advertisers would want to put the likes Sky+ or iPhone in the ads between that because they know that that audience would more than likely buy the products. I imagine if Top Gear was on a commericial channel, they would charge a premium because it attracts males and a younger audience. |
|
|
|
|
#2008 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 18,788
|
Quote:
I knew there had been plenty of clashes in the past, but even I was surprised there had been 40 of them before last night!
Last night was the first time in a long while that an entire X Factor show has clashed against Strictly. |
|
|
|
|
#2009 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 29,512
|
For those saying about Casino Royale. Having just checked Media Guardian and BARB, the last Bond film before Royale, 'Die Another Day' premiered on Wednesday, October 27th, 2004. Below are the official and overnight ratings:
21:00 to 22:30 - 7.9m (33%) [official: 7.55m] 22:30 to 23:00 - ITV News: 5.13m [official] 23:00 to 00:05 - 5.6m (46%) [official: under 4.83m] So ITV did last night exactly the same as what they did for the previous premiere in the 'Bond' film strand. |
|
|
|
|
#2010 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,541
|
Quote:
Haven't most of the 40 clashes been something like 10 or 15 minutes?
Last night was the first time in a long while that an entire X Factor show has clashed against Strictly. I suspect 2006 might have been one of the worst years for that, as there were something like four consecutive weeks of both shows having identical start-times.
|
|
|
|
|
#2011 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London
Posts: 9,020
|
Quote:
Also, the deal that netted ITV first run rights to the Bond films expired with Die Another Day, hence why Casino Royale was on Sky first. The same thing will happen with Quantum of Solace as per the deal with Sony, so don't expect to see QoS on ITV anytime before 2011 at the earliest. It'll probably be on Sky this Christmas though. |
|
|
|
|
#2012 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 29,512
|
Quote:
Some were definitely short, but unfortunately the BBC spokesperson didn't provide any more details other than there had been forty previous clashes.
I suspect 2006 might have been one of the worst years for that, as there were something like four consecutive weeks of both shows having identical start-times. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
#2013 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,387
|
Quote:
Some were definitely short, but unfortunately the BBC spokesperson didn't provide any more details other than there had been forty previous clashes.
I suspect 2006 might have been one of the worst years for that, as there were something like four consecutive weeks of both shows having identical start-times. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
#2014 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,541
|
Quote:
I've just said something about this here - http://www.offthetelly.co.uk/?p=7559 - but yes, many times they've clashed for almost their entire length, plus their results shows. In fact in 2004, the finals were on the same night, with Strictly at 7pm and The X Factor at 6.30pm, and again the results shows at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
#2015 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 29,512
|
Quote:
I've just said something about this here - http://www.offthetelly.co.uk/?p=7559 - but yes, many times they've clashed for almost their entire length, plus their results shows. In fact in 2004, the finals were on the same night, with Strictly at 7pm and The X Factor at 6.30pm, and again the results shows at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
#2016 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,020
|
Quote:
Haven't most of the 40 clashes been something like 10 or 15 minutes?
Last night was the first time in a long while that an entire X Factor show has clashed against Strictly. |
|
|
|
|
#2017 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 30,110
|
Quote:
Arguably, neither SCD or X Factor were as big 3 years ago as they are now.
|
|
|
|
|
#2018 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 17,742
|
Quote:
Why haven't the BBC been emphasising this numeric fact to shut up everyone, especially thick, ignorant, bandwagon-jumping politicans, who's been going on about this clash?
![]() ![]() Nobody died last night (apart from SCD's illusions). Lets enjoy the spin. When you are the underdog up against a Goliath with a mountain of cash & cross promotion opportunites, a bit of guerilla marketing goes a long way. Well done ITVs PR team for earning their keep.
|
|
|
|
|
#2019 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 12,049
|
Quote:
X Factor probably got 9.5-9.6m factoring out the ads in the last 5 minutes.
Quote:
The BBC decision seems to have back fired massively. They have achived ratings defeat
I must have missed this statement of intent in the press release - can you point me towards it George? Quote:
So glad XF won SCD. Hope the BBC have egg on their face now.
Perhaps the Beeb are happy that they have avoided SCD starting with 5/6m and having to build throughout the show for once? And as a bonus, they didn't bequeath their 8-9m audience to what remains of TXF, giving it the chance to get 11m as last year. (Though next week TXF has a clear 30 mins after SCD finishes) And as the primetime shares will confirm, it was not a bad night for BBC1 at all. Quote:
Strong night there for ITV!.
Quote:
Saturday primetime shares by the way: Barely a gnat's fart between them.ITV1: 29.3% BBC1: 28.6% Quote:
I'm surprised TXF beat SCD, I didn't think it was possible to beat the BBC promotion machine, but I suppose the daily updates on Breakfast, It Take's Two, The One Show and across BBC National and local radio hasn't started yet...
Quote:
Whilst The X-Factor has taken what ITV should surely see as a pleasing win, I'm certainly not disheartened by SCD ratings. All it shows me is that both shows can co-exist together and both get good ratings. I don't think there's any need to fiddle about with the schedules.
Quote:
The difference now is the XF. First the Cheryl Cole thing, then more importantly, the Susan Boyle effect, have pushed these Cowell formats into the stratosphere ratings-wise.
Quote:
Any views on tonights ratings?I personally see this.
ITV1: 9:00 Doc Martin 9.4m Quote:
Hmm, according to DS:
TXF peaked at 20:55 with 10.72m (42.6%) SCD peaked at 21:00 with 8.68m (35.7%) I presume TXF went to a break straight after the 'peak' and as thus viewers tuned to Strictly for a little bit. Hm? Quote:
I notice that the front page story on the Sunday Mirror today appears to be "EXCLUSIVE - ALESHA IS CRAP". No wonder newspapers are going to the dogs.
![]() And we know how anti-Beeb much of DS and its most regular contributors are... Quote:
For those saying about Casino Royale. Having just checked Media Guardian and BARB, the last Bond film before Royale, 'Die Another Day' premiered on Wednesday, October 27th, 2004. Below are the official and overnight ratings:
21:00 to 22:30 - 7.9m (33%) [official: 7.55m] 22:30 to 23:00 - ITV News: 5.13m [official] 23:00 to 00:05 - 5.6m (46%) [official: under 4.83m] So ITV did last night exactly the same as what they did for the previous premiere in the 'Bond' film strand. |
|
|
|
#2020 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 10,940
|
Quote:
Perhaps the Beeb are happy that they have avoided SCD starting with 5/6m and having to build throughout the show for once? And as a bonus, they didn't bequeath their 8-9m audience to what remains of TXF, giving it the chance to get 11m as last year. (Though next week TXF has a clear 30 mins after SCD finishes)
And as the primetime shares will confirm, it was not a bad night for BBC1 at all. Barely a gnat's fart between them. But you're right about primetime audience shares. BBC1 will be well satisfied with that result. |
|
|
|
|
#2021 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cymru
Posts: 12,702
|
Quote:
Good for Brown I guess considering the SCD clash - good timeshift as well.
Quote:
Advertisers who's product aims for the 16 to 34 range would not advertise a lot during Corrie, Doc Martin and programmes of that type - whereas they'd advertise a lot more in football programmes and The X Factor.
There is talk of demographics, but networks only really care about demographics when the overall figure isn't too good. Always used to make me laugh when ITV kept pointing out the high proportion of 16-34 year olds who watched Echo Beach, overlooking the fact that the lower rating meant there were less 16-34s watching than would watch a repeat of A Touch of Frost. Quote:
Apparently on Champions League nights, a commercial spot can be sold at a 500% higher cost than usual due to the high number of 16-34 males watching.
It can actually be up to 10 times the rate due to the lower commercial minutage during the football. |
|
|
|
#2022 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,020
|
Quote:
Far be it for me to criticise this forum's BBC Champion (being a mostly-BBC viewer myself) but Strictly and The X Factor both have exactly the same slot next Saturday as this.
But you're right about primetime audience shares. BBC1 will be well satisfied with that result. I must work on my posts here-Robbie Sykes has quoted about 15 people but not me. |
|
|
|
|
#2023 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 18,788
|
Quote:
Actually isn't Corrie the nations most watched show by 16-34 year olds.
EastEnders gets close to 2m. X Factor has around 3m. Britain's Got Talent is higher than Corrie as well. There's other shows also which get more 16-34s watching. In a recent report, it said that 31.5% of Coronation Street's audience were aged over 65. |
|
|
|
|
#2024 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,895
|
Quote:
It seems to have been passed over that X Factor had its lowest audience this year and lost a million viewers.
So, against that, last nights 9.3m is excellent. Next week will be interesting, don't the Bootcamp episodes usually dip a bit ? |
|
|
|
|
#2025 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 117,021
|
I think the issue is that before The X Factor and Strictly Come Dancing always clashed, that people got used to it. Neither were as big as they are now (possibly because they were weakening each other), and when ITV moved The X Factor later, people got used to having the opportunity to watch their two programmes without any mucking about. The situation came about because BBC1 had no reason to move Strictly Come Dancing later to start the clash again (and many 'fantasy' schedules have been written to prove as such).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OK rant over, and I shall never ever make a prediction again. Pizza (or anyone who predicted The X Factor would beat Strictly Come Dancing) - why did you think that, when Strictly had a 35 minute lead in, had it's results show on the same night and was the opening weekend of the programme. This against a show which has reached something like it's fifth week, has numerous repeats and whose audition format had been much derided. I'd understand if it dipped during the filler, but Strictly was lower throughout the clash. I'm astounded to be honest. ![]() ![]() Elsewhere - great that The Cube held up in an earlier timeslot, but Merlin performed well as well, albeit lower than what it was getting last year, obviously hindered by the lower slot. Channel 4 did ok, better than it's previous Saturday's with Lord of the Rings dominating the schedule. Five struggled below 1m for most of the primetime. |
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:18.






