these 2 would have happened regardless.

Buying out GMTV means no longer having to exclude 25% of the earnings and also alllows back office mergers.

The HD upgrade would always have required a new set.

Fair enough ITV have spent money on the new launch but I dont think the £30m is anywhere near the true cost of the relaunch.

But is the extra 25% of earnings really worth the whole investment if it doesn't work out? The 25% stake in GMTV cost £22m, Adrian & Christine cost £6m and £4m so theres £32m straight away before you even consider everything else. Its also not been completely merged, the GMTV sales team is still separate to ITV.

GMTV would have had to have a studio refit for HD, but the set would be nowhere near to the standard of Daybreak. They have a long way to go before Daybreak will make a profit, and as I said in my previous post they could have left the 25% stake alone, done another GMTV revamp and still be making a profit.

Very poor for Home and Away yesterday. They've promoted its return as well so I can't put it down to that. Bit of a worry.

Oh for the days when it would pull in 5-6m an episode back in 2000.


LOL! Quite a serious post with some good points made but that line just made it. Nearly spewed my drink over the keyboard!


Ahh, so you bought that spiel of his? Eamonn would have jumped at the chance to join Daybreak IMO - me thinks the negotiations didn't go well (i.e. he was making far too many ridiculous demands) and so they approached Adrian instead.


At least its ratings stabilised on day 3. About the only good thing I can say about Daybreak's performance at the moment - those AI numbers you posted are awful!

The One show had Alexander Armstrong co-hosting last night, JM must have took the night off. I only had a brief look as I was working but up against Emmerdale I would expect TOS to be dented.

People like to watch soaps constantly to follow the storyline but shows like TOS can be dipped into occasionally once or twice a week, so that would explain the peaks and troughs.

Are we going to see a 10m Eastenders tonight or Friday?

I'm a bit confused about 'Enders. Is the big episode tonight? I thought it was tomorrow night!

Or does it spill over?

a high 8 million seems likely for both Thursday and Friday

invisible post

Well Philth has been let out of his cell I can see fireworks as the reception is in full flow, the fire will take hold as the doof doofs kick in. Hopefully it will be the week's highest soap rating - till friday that is

As Britain's brightest daytime show prepares for its first ever primetime broadcast, The Grauniad writes:


Source & more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-rad...primetime-slot

Poor for Bang Goes The Theory in an easy slot. It probably would have rated roughly the same at 7.30pm on Monday, against Coronation St, which is where it should be scheduled, but it's Jay Hunt's baby, so maybe that's why it gets a good slot it doesn't deserve.

Will be interesting to see how The Wright Stuff does, not particularly well I suspect. Having said that I've often thought that should Sky News ever head down the opinion route in prime time they could do alot worse than Matthew Wright.

For an advocate of Sky News like yourself this is a bizarre comment to make. Do you really think opinion-led news is the way forward?

This isn't America. I'd like to think news audiences over here are looking for something a bit more substantial.

Sky tried to go down this road before (Littlejohn et al) and look what happened. Viewers rejected it then and will do so again.

Matthew Wright is a great presenter but he's fine where is. Apart from Sky News being a massive demotion for him, it's simply not (or at least shouldn't be) the right venue for his programme.

On the point about tonight's primetime special, I agree with you. I'm not expecting it to do terribly well either. (I've predicted 500k) I'd love to be pleasantly surprised.

I've predicted it low but I will be surprised if it does over 500k. I imagine its ratings are similar if not better than LFSF and Five News at 7.

Good night for ITV, Unforgettable did pretty well. Not much else to add, well apart from Daybreak heading further into GMTV zone.

Completely agree. TV News journalism in this country is something to be proud of, to head down the opinion route of American news would be appalling and I don't think it the would appeal to the public either.

It's funny you should mention this topic because earlier on today, Kay Burley was interviewing a Labour MP about the phone hacking scandal in a very fox news style/aggressive way. The MP caught on to the way she was speaking to him and in a rather heated interview preceeded to call her 'dim' and that she was forcing her opinion on the viewers. (She deserved it ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDYal...ure=youtu.be&a

Not one of Sky News' best moments.

Ye gods!

Regarding Daybreak and BBC Breakfast - the ratings shows that most of the country aren't brain dead (I watched a bit of Daybreak and in-between the ads, when the programme was on - they asked at £1.50 from a BT landline, how many years there were in a century ). So much for making it much more "news led"

And to top it off "Today" on Radio Four is the most listened too breakfast programme in the London (and nationally gets 6 million listeners)

Hurray, not all, in fact most of the UK aren't pig shit thick.

Why do ITV carry on with it's drivel? (Bargin Hunt on BBc1 gets twice as many viewers as Loose Women at the same time - even though it's not the most taxing of programming).

The 6m for Radio 4 isnt an average figure. Its the total reach. If you are going to compare breakfast tv with breakfast radio, should you not use either reach, AQR, or programme average for both?

Apologies I should have been clearer, I absolutely do not wish to see Sky News or indeed any other UK news organization head down the opinion news route, although it could be argued that on occasion 'Jeff Randall Live' comes worryingly close to it.

The point I was making is that Wright seems a competent presenter and if Sky were to go down that route, not that I am advocating them doing so, I think he would be a wiser choice than the likes of Richard Littlejohn. As you say ratings wise these shows are not proven to do well here and even if there were no regulations preventing it, I suspect the cost in making such shows, the cost to the wider organizations reputation and indeed the cost in viewers means Sky would decide against it.

Radio ratings are measured differently from TV and they get published annually rather than daily and there is not many national radio stations, you cannot compare it to Daybreak and BBC Breakfast. Moyles for example does very well but in London the number one Breakfast show is Johnny and Lisa on Capital,

On commercial radio, but overall, Radio Four in London get's the most listeners.

Quarterly, and RAJAR do break them down into regions.

According to RAJAR, Today averages 6 million listeners each day, not reach.

Breakfast radio is the main reason why BBC Breakfast and Daybreak don't do better, nobody watches the whole three hours as most are getting ready for work and school so the radio become more conivient for news, travel and the odd bit of music. I remember a radio presenter daying that breakfast is to radio what primetime is to television.

They mean that, on average, 6m listeners tune in each day(for a certain amount of time). Not that the program averages 6m across the period in the same way that we talk about TV ratings.

Early US ratings indicate that The CW had a decent night. The premiere of Hellcats built on its America's Next Top Model lead-in and was up a staggering 116% among A18-49 from 2009's premiere of The Beautiful Life in the same slot. It also grew its audience in all key measures from the first half hour to the second.