I remember an early 1990s trail with Barry Norman proudly announcing a new, regular 10.10pm Monday slot. That slot didn't last long either.

Bring back Last of the Summer Wine.

Just done some quick calculations on CH4 and CH5's primetime shares over the past 3 weeks, from DS' reports:

W/B 27/9
CH4-5.4%
CH5-5.2%

W/B 4/10
CH4-4.9%
CH5-4.7%

W/B 11/10
CH4-5.4%
CH5-4.6%

W/B 18/10 (4 days)
CH5-5.4%
CH4-5.3%

Now these don't include +1 for CH4 which would add on ~1%, but I still find those stats shocking. A primetime share average of around 5% is awful for CH4, especially considering CH5's primetime share consists of the awfully rating 7pm hour. Without it CH5 would be slightly higher.

I don't agree with adding +1 figures, anyway.

Not sure if it's been mentioned yet but EastEnders goes HD on Christmas day with anumber of massive storylines running.

EastEnders will air on BBC1HD in a few weeks time but will be upscaled

Why not, out of interest?

I personally think +1 should be included because the effect of having a +1 channel is that viewers who would otherwise have considered watching or actually watched a show on the main Channel 4, might have decided to opt for another channel which doesn't have a +1 service, and opted for the C4 programme on +1 an hour later. It gives viewers an option to watch a particular programme an hour later and I don't think that should be ignored, especially when it can be quite a major portion of the audience.

I don't believe in the theory that the +1 channels increases a broadcaster's share over if there wasn't a +1 channel. The presence of a +1 channel means that the main channel loses a few of the 'marginal' viewers who would've watched a programme then, and re-balances it with those 'marginal' viewers an hour later.

Back to what ZoeM says, though, yep it must be a big concern for the Channel 4 executives to see C5 so close to it during primetime in the last 3 weeks. At least before, they could go through a temporary bad patch and rely on BB to bring in the viewers during January and the summer but they won't have that option anymore. C4's future is looking bleak.

I suppose it just reminds me of the days when the ratings for the first and second screenings of the same programme on the same channel in the same week were added together.

At first, it was just EastEnders with its omnibus, then the Coronation St omnibus came along, but towards later years of BARB aggregating the figures, things had become a little farcical, with lots of programmes getting same week repeats, and their ratings appearing much better than other programmes whose repeats came after Sunday night, and therefore couldn't be added, and the figures of other shows getting no repeats at all. There was even a time when Coronation St was getting three screenings of each episode added together.

I think adding the C4 and C4+1 figures for an individual programme's two screenings is a return to that old business of aggregating.

I agree the +1 channel doesn't really increase the broadcaster's share, but if the broadcaster chooses to split a programme's audience between two broadcasts, I prefer to see the split, rather than a combined figure.

Similarly, with the shares for the two channels, I prefer to see the split.

Obviously, there's nothing wrong with the C4+1 share being added into the total share for the C4 group of channels, along with More4, E4 etc. I just don't like C4 and C4+1 being added together and treated as one channel rather than two.

But the EE/Corrie omnibus thing is completely different to +1 channels. The omnibuses were shown a few days after the original broadcast whereas the +1 channels are just one hour later.

Under current BARB rules, viewers who record a programme and watch it on the same night later on, are counted towards the overnight figures of a programme: Viewing-On-Same-Day-As-Live as explained here. So surely by similar reasoning, people who watch a programme an hour later should not be ignored in the ratings?

I'm not saying BARB should automatically aggregate the main channel and +1 figures together. But I don't think the +1 audiences should be ignored which is what I thought you meant from your previous post, although in this most recent post you've said you wouldn't mind seeing a 'split' (e.g. +1 noted in addition to the main channel). Personally I don't think there's anything wrong with combining the all day/primetime shares of C4 and C4+1 because although they're two separate channels on the EPG, they're basically directly linked together as they show exactly the same programmes (albeit 1 hour later), so combining gives a more accurate figure of how many people watched 'Channel 4 the terrestrial broadcaster' during a certain day/evening. It certainly gives a more accurate impression than if the +1 share is ignored completely.

I've a feeling there could be a bit of a row on when ITV1 +1 launches (next year, I believe).

I do think +1's do help reach a wider audience than a single showing could. The channels wouldn't run them if they didn't. We shouldn't underestimate the number of people who don't really make concious choices about their TV: +1's have a big impact on casual shows.

For instance, consider if there was a BBC One +1 - I reckon we'd see 'wallpaper TV' like The One Show or Countryfile pulling higher aggregated figures than their single showings do now. By contrast, "same day" viewing generally requires people make a concious decision to record and watch a show.

If we include +1's as we include HD, then I think we'll see certain posters insisting on stuff like the EE repeat too. After all, surely thats just BBC One +2.

Pretty funny 'change' on the Sky EPG. Instead of being called their actual programme names in the slot, the 06:00 to 09:25 slot on ITV1 this weekend is simply called 'CITV on GMTV'.

They're still second screenings, whether they're one hour or a few days later, so that's why I don't like it.


I think it's different to watch a second screening (i.e. repeat) of a programme than it is to watch a recording of the programme's first screening.

What was that C4 programme shown twice in one night? Was it The Family? We didn't add the figures for the 9pm screening to the late night repeat on the same channel, so why add the figures for anything in tonight's C4 schedule to the figures for its repeat on the separate C4+1 channel?

Has anyone mentioned Anne and her wires tommorow night, could it bump up the ratings...even more?
I know the story was in the sun

I disagree. I think it most definitely does increase share compared to if there was no +1. Sure, some people only use C4+1 to watch programmes they were going to watch anyway at more suitable times, for example if there is a schedule clash with something else they want to watch. But the amount of people that plan to watch something on C4+1 in that way are in my opinion quite low in number, especially in this age of PVRs. Even in that scenario there is a chance that the viewer would simply have not watched the programme if the +1 had not been available, or watched a later repeat. What is far more likely, is C4+1 is picking up a lot of EPG roamers who are trying to find something to watch. They didn't seek or plan to watch that content originally, but they've come across it because there is little else on and they've finished watching the stuff they intended to watch.

So I don't like to see them added together myself. If ITV1 and Channel Five both had +1 services as well, then I would say fair enough because then it would be a level playing field. But otherwise my preference is to keep them separate.

Fascinating stuff Zoe, cheers. As you say the 7pm hour drags down Ch5's share considerably- it would be interesting to see an 8pm-11pm comparison.

Great to see Ch5 currently leading this week, however it's all downhill after tonight.

FRIDAY
Ch5 may just edge a win tonight as my hopes are not very high for The Event. As a rule these big US shows tend to start high (at least 2m, often over 3m) and then peter out over time. But they've given it such a bad timeslot I'm not sure it'll even start that well and Ch5 have the brilliant Mentalist and the surprisingly high rating Eddie Stobart to see them through. This will be the closest night of the three.

Prediction: Narrow Ch5 win.

SATURDAY
Tomorrow on the other hand should be a walk in the park for Ch4. The Pillars of the Earth got off to a very respectable start last week and I see no reason for its numbers to destabilise this week with the reviews largely positive. Ch5 on the other hand are having a bit of a nightmare on Saturdays, the only day of the week which seems to be getting worse and not better. Not much they can do about the audience swallowing beast on the other side, but one has to question whether repeating The Mentalist from the night before is particularly wise. Movies would fair better I feel, with a CSI repeat timed to start directly after TXF.

Prediction: Comfortable Ch4 win.

SUNDAY
Sunday is an interesting one with both Ch4 and Ch5 likely to do well but Ch4's female-skewing lineup should be enough to secure them a reasonable win here. The Wrong Coms on Ch5 are all repeats this week whereas last week they had a premiere. That said I think Bad Santa could potentially outrate Superbad, but won't beat Ch4's solid if unspectacular pairing of Secret Millionaire and Desperate Housewives.

Prediction: Ch4 win.

On the topic of C4, nice mini-refresh today with some new idents and a refresh of the graphics package (which pretty much stood the test of time over six years).

Looking at last night's ratings - the Harry docu-drama was never really about ratings, so not too concerning IMO - though a question whether they might be better off playing such things on More4 first instead.

Also True Blood is an interesting one - like so many HBO shows before it it's now getting bumped later and later and losing viewers (on the night at least) as a result - but perhaps 0.5-0.6m from 10.30-11.45 is actually a better result for C4 than the 0.8-0.9m it was bringing in from 10-11.15pm. Be interesting to see how it performs at 11.05pm next week.

What clear evidence is there, though, showing that +1 boosts the overall audience compared to if there was no +1?

If we look at the E4+1 launch... from January to May 2003 before the launch, E4 averaged a 1.2% share. From January to May 2004 after the launch, E4 (excluding +1) averaged a 0.8% share. Of course in reality the channel's programming lineup wasn't watched by 33% fewer viewers a year later because the +1 channel was attracting audiences who would otherwise have watched on the main channel, hence with +1 included E4's share [inc. +1] was 1.0% for that period, a more realistic 13% decline.

A similar thing happened to Channel 4 after the launch C4+1. Their overall share or programme audiences didn't increase at all, in fact it decreased once +1 started. It might've been a natural decline but there definitely was no sign of C4+1 helping them increase their overall audiences.


I believe one of the main reasons commercial channels run them is because they can charge advertisers more money for a certain no. of viewers on a +1 channel than the same no. of viewers on the main channel. I don't know why that's the case but it is.


I don't think that would be the case. People just wouldn't watch the +1 channel when Countryfile/One Show are on and the +1 ratings for them would be very small to actually result in a noticeable increase in their aggregated figures compared to the single showings. I wish there was a 'wallpaper TV' show on C4 that I could think of so I could check its ratings to see if +1 has an effect on its overall figures, but I can't think of one!


Fair point sn_22, you have me stumped with that one !


How is it different though? If person A records 9pm's Big Brother and watches it for the first time at 10pm, they're included in the overnights for BB. Why should person B, who watches BB for the first time at 10pm on C4+1 be ignored or treated differently ratings-wise to person A? That sort of scenario is not different at all IMO.


A gap of one hour is different in the mindset of people to a gap of 3 hours or 3-7 days (the omnibus example) though. If a person, who doesn't have a PVR, is watching TV at 9pm, for example, and there are two non-live programmes they equally want to watch: one is on ITV1 and one is on Channel 4. The likelihood is that they'd opt for the ITV1 programme and then watch the other programme on C4+1 an hour later because a +1 service for C4 is available. If there was no C4+1, they may well have watched the C4 programme at 9pm instead of the ITV1 one.

A person who is watching TV at 9pm usually won't be watching TV at midnight, hence the late-night repeat (the Family example) won't make a difference to their decision at all, hence why I think there's a difference between combining a +1 channel's rating to a main rating than doing it for a late-night repeat.

It's a bit difficult to explain but another example is: When Big Brother aired at 9pm on C4, it nearly always used to have its biggest +1 audiences when there was major competition on the other channels. It's no coincidence that its C4 figure dropped but +1 figure picked up when BBC1 or ITV1 aired a big-rated programme, because people who might've otherwise might have watched C4 if there was no +1 channel tuned into the BBC1/ITV1 programme and watched BB an hour later.

The +1 channels do have a negative effect on the main channels, I'm sure of it. How much of a negative effect it has is difficult to say unless extensive research is done. But I do believe, for example taking ZoeMcCallister's post (although he already noted it already), that C4's lead over C5 in primetime is bigger than just the paltry 0.1-0.3% which some of those figures (excluding +1) suggested. C5 isn't actually as close as that to Channel 4, the significant 1% or so on C4+1 shouldn't be ignored, as many of them would've watched the programme on C4 anyway if the +1 sevice wasn't available.

I'm not trying to undermine C5's achievement but the truth is it's not as close to C4 as those figures suggest, and as such, the +1 audiences shouldn't be ignored. After this convo/debate/whatever you call it!, I do think writing it separately is the best option (i.e. BB: 2.0m, +1: 200k), but if there were two options: 1. including +1 or 2. excluding +1 and not mentioning it at all, I'd always prefer to go for option 1. I know you lot disagree with me though !

Critically acclaimed HBO shows are all well and good and it's great that Ch4 have given mass audiences the chance to watch and enjoy them over the years but they're never going to rate brilliantly. It's no loss to the terrestrials really that it's all going to be hidden away on Sky Atlantic from next year.

Different timeslots I know so not completely fair to compare but last night's new episode of True Blood on C4 was almost outrated by a repeat of The Big Bang Theory on E4. (0.56m v 0.54m)

I don't think +1 should be added to main channel showings either. Sometimes you might get people saying something like "Grand Designs came 1st in its slot at 9pm with 4million viewers" when in fact it didn't because 500k of those were watching on +1 at 10pm. That will no doubt become an increasing issue once ITV1 +1 launches.(that was a made up example to illustrate the point btw.)

I'm all for adding HD simulcast ratings to main channel ratings though. Indeed I like to see the +1 ratings, just think they should be a recorded as a seperate number.

Not really a big issue for me anyway, as I can usually find whatever ratings with or without +1 when I need to.

Ratings were so much simpler before HD and +1s!

Well, there isn't any. But common sense tells you that you are going to reach more people if you show something twice once after the other. I think you are exaggerating the number that will seek out content on a +1 as opposed to those that just stumble upon it whilst channel hopping that wouldn't otherwise have watched.


Viewing habits for the digital channels are a little different I feel. Everything is more casual with much less appointment-to-view television. So I could understand a +1 being more detrimental to its parent station than when a terrestrial channel is involved.


I think you are a bit if I'm honest. There's always someone wanting to rain on Ch5's parade, today is your turn. It is as close as the figures suggest because we are comparing Channel 4 as a standalone service with Channel 5 as a standalone service. Completely legitimate. Following your logic we might as well combine Channel 5's share with FIVER since the latter acts as a +24 service most of the time!

The problem with +1's is that they can't just be discounted. I think the overall effect is likely to be a small increase but there's certainly going to be a decrease in the first run if it's being shown 60 minutes later.

It can make timeslot comparisons difficult - but then again, we don't know how many of the "overnight" viewers actually watched a show at the time it was broadcast. They could have been watching Corrie at 11.30pm. So no point agonising over that.

Indeed . Before we know it, there'll be +2 and 3D channels which we'll have to take into account !


Oh come off it. I'm not trying to rain on Channel 5's parade, it was just more of a general point regarding +1 channels, which I wanted to talk about anyway but conveniently came up when Pizza mentioned he didn't think they should be included.

But I do stand by what I said previously that you can't treat C4 as a standalone channel when they've got a +1 channel which is pulling in a decent share and is to some extent affecting their main channel share.

Paul O'Grady is being less dismissive about a possible role on BGT tonight. He ruled it out completely a few weeks ago but is now saying he will do it if Simon slaps money on the table.

I think it'd be good for BGT myself.

I suspect the True Blood deal means it can only air on C4, but it would probably be of more worth to them on either E4 or More4.

Louis and Sharon Osbourne both rumoured too according to the pair. With Piers gone and possibly Simon there is little point in keeping Amanda and I think the rumoured trio would be an excellent panel. BGT skews older than X Factor so they don't really have to worry about targetting a predominantly young audience as they perhaps would if the same panel was in place on X Factor.

Going off topic, I know I go on about it but does anyone have yesterdays Daybreak figure? I know Wednesday was 0.7m with Kate & Dan but I'd be interested to see if Thursday seen another rise as it did last time. Expect some record lows this week, it may even drop to 0.5m, its half term and Adrian & Christine will be on. I do think they've missed an opportunity by not giving Adrian & Christine a week off (not necessarily half term week) during October to mess with the format and see how well audiences take to Kate & Dan.