• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • TV Shows: UK
The Ratings Thread (Part 17)
<<
<
48 of 122
>>
>
sstripling
21-02-2011
Quote:
“05 - 8.80m - BIG FAT GYPSY WEDDINGS (08/02/11) - C4”

WOW - great to see a C4 show in the top 5.

Quote:
“07 - 1.41m - MIDSOMER MURDERS (08/01/11) - ITV3
09 - 1.35m - FOYLE'S WAR (13/02/11) - ITV3”

You can see why ITV3 has taken over ITV2 as most popular MC. These drama repeats seem to do very well.

Quote:
“12 - 1.20m - CELEBRITY JUICE (10/02/11) - ITV2”

Great to see Celebrity Juice do well. It's a really fun show and seems to have become one of the ITV2 "main shows."
ftv
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by Chris1964:
“My word! Ten years is a long long time and this is somewhat out of the blue. Whilst not sweeping all before it like during the long variety heyday, its going to be very useful in the run up to Christmas.
Im very surprised, the BBC is supposed to be into events that bring the public together but clearly so is ITV , and the BBC is being muscled out it seems-certainly regarding half of this "event". I wonder if there is any shock at BBC HQ.”

I doubt the BBC will be that bothered, the show has been declining in audience over the years and is something of an anachronism. It no longer seems to have the big star names of the past. But it would be interesting to know if the BBC were given the chance to bid for it.
mlt11
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by sstripling:
“Quite a coup for ITV to get it exclusive, especially with the somewhat renewed interest in the royals lately, thanks to the wedding this year, 60th Jubilee next year etc. Intresting, because of being one of them royal events I thought it was a bit more like the Xmas message. i.e Buckingham Palace etc deciding rather than ITV/BBC bidding for it. But i suppose thinking about it. it's more of an Entertainment Artistes' Benevolent Fund decsion.”

I think we're starting to see the impact of the 20% spending cuts at the BBC over the next few years.

If someone else (ie primarily ITV or Sky) makes a substantial bid for Event X - which would mean the BBC needing to pay a lot more for Event X than it does at present - then the BBC is going to find it almost impossible to justify doing so at the same time as it is making substantial redundancies and renegotiating the pay deals of top stars downwards.

Up to now there's been quite a bit of talk about cuts but we've not really actually seen that feeding through on screen. I think this is now going to start happening.
sstripling
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by ftv:
“I doubt the BBC will be that bothered, the show has been declining in audience over the years and is something of an anachronism. It no longer seems to have the big star names of the past. But it would be interesting to know if the BBC were given the chance to bid for it.”

I hate when people do this. Just say "doubt .... will be that bothered" and then don't justify it . Then you put "the show has been declining in audience over the years" and don't put any figures? Obvioulsy it's not going to be 20 million or whatever it was about 30 years ago. But just having a look on MG the last two have had 8.8m & 8.3. So pretty good IMO.

Originally Posted by mlt11:
“I think we're starting to see the impact of the 20% spending cuts at the BBC over the next few years.

If someone else (ie primarily ITV or Sky) makes a substantial bid for Event X - which would mean the BBC needing to pay a lot more for Event X than it does at present - then the BBC is going to find it almost impossible to justify doing so at the same time as it is making substantial redundancies and renegotiating the pay deals of top stars downwards.

Up to now there's been quite a bit of talk about cuts but we've not really actually seen that feeding through on screen. I think this is now going to start happening.”

Good point didn't think of that.
Chris1964
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by mlt11:
“I think we're starting to see the impact of the 20% spending cuts at the BBC over the next few years.

If someone else (ie primarily ITV or Sky) makes a substantial bid for Event X - which would mean the BBC needing to pay a lot more for Event X than it does at present - then the BBC is going to find it almost impossible to justify doing so at the same time as it is making substantial redundancies and renegotiating the pay deals of top stars downwards.

Up to now there's been quite a bit of talk about cuts but we've not really actually seen that feeding through on screen. I think this is now going to start happening.”

I dont disagree, but whatever happens the BBC still has 3 billion plus income-its got to spend the money somewhere. This is where it starts to get ridiculous if the anti-BBC lobby makes a meal of everything the BBC does. Whether its the RVP, FA Cup, stars salaries -everything is under the microspcope of a vocal and sometimes meddlesome crowd. Like I say-money has to be spent somewhere.
Bushmills
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by mancitybean:
“Does anyone know what the FA Cup football and highlights got on ITV1 yesterday? Cheers”

The live programme averaged 3.4m/ 24% share.

The highlights show averaged 1.4m/ 11% share.
mlt11
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by Chris1964:
“I dont disagree, but whatever happens the BBC still has 3 billion plus income-its got to spend the money somewhere.”

Yes, but a lot of the BBC's costs are fairly fixed - all the infrastucture, buildings, studios etc etc.

At a time of cuts it's the discretionary items that come under pressure. If they are asked to pay a lot more for something - whether it's US Masters golf, the Royal Variety (and who knows F1 or Six Nations in a couple of years time) it's very hard to justify spending a lot more on something when overall you are making significant cuts.

Because if they do spend more anywhere, then the cuts in other areas have to be even steeper.
RobbieSykes123
21-02-2011
Surprising news re the RVP, and I wonder if there's a bit of surprise at the BBC at this news too.

Fair enough if ITV has decided to pump tens of millions of pounds to secure this fading spectacle for a decade, which the Beeb feels it would rather put into making quality programming than trying to outbid ITV for something they alone can make some ad money out of.

But if the Beeb hasn't even had the chance to respond and it's a bit of a stitch-up, like over the FA Cup/England rights, then that leaves a sour taste.

Either way, I suspect the Beeb will quite happily let ITV get on with taking the RVP ever-more downmarket. It's not the event it once was.
GeorgeS
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by Chris1964:
“Like I say-money has to be spent somewhere.”

Not necessarily. You take the stance that you need £3bn to run those networks. Maybe you could actually run it for £2bn with an efficient operation. I know £1bn probably is just loose change to you but it would make me very happy.
GeorgeS
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by RobbieSykes123:
“Either way, I suspect the Beeb will quite happily let ITV get on with taking the RVP ever-more downmarket. It's not the event it once was.”

Bring back Queen Victoria!
Dancc
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by rzt:
“Sunday 20th February Overnights
Channel 5
20:00- Royal Navy Caribbean Patrol: 661k (2.3%)
21:00- Ghost Rider: 1.44m (6.2%)”

*bangs head against nearest wall*

Why Channel 5, why? The original schedule had Superman followed by Ghost Rider. Then they changed it to include that factual repeat. Not needed! If they'd left it alone they'd have beat Channel 4 in the primetime shares last night. Sundays were working just fine without these factual repeats in between, now Hancock is going to get a crap lead-in next week instead of a good lead-in from Superman 2.

Originally Posted by rzt:
“Dave (inc. +1)
18:00- The Gadget Show: 377k”

Very good rating for classic Gadget Show on Dave. It seems to have fitted in excellently there.
Chris1964
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by GeorgeS:
“Not necessarily. You take the stance that you need £3bn to run those networks. Maybe you could actually run it for £2bn with an efficient operation. I know £1bn probably is just loose change to you but it would make me very happy.”

I wished the loose change bit did apply.

Its not my stance the 3 billion is needed, Im just assuming thats the income. As far as I know the BBC does not give money back, and I know the spend is far more than just programme acquisition. Presumably if efficiencies resulted in 2 billion rather than 3 the Beeb could buy the Premiership rights. Though presumably you would be looking for a reduction in the licence fee
Chris1964
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by RobbieSykes123:
“Surprising news re the RVP, and I wonder if there's a bit of surprise at the BBC at this news too.

Fair enough if ITV has decided to pump tens of millions of pounds to secure this fading spectacle for a decade, which the Beeb feels it would rather put into making quality programming than trying to outbid ITV for something they alone can make some ad money out of.

But if the Beeb hasn't even had the chance to respond and it's a bit of a stitch-up, like over the FA Cup/England rights, then that leaves a sour taste.

Either way, I suspect the Beeb will quite happily let ITV get on with taking the RVP ever-more downmarket. It's not the event it once was.”

You can see it being Cowellised cant you?
RobbieSykes123
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by GeorgeS:
“Bring back Queen Victoria!”

It's the lack of genuine big star names that's been killing interest in the RVP.

Every year recently, it's been the same old B-, C- and Z-listers. Here-today, gone tomorrow pop sensations, reality celebs and whichever stand-up comic has been ubiquitous that given year.

Bet it will be Russell Kane this year. He's on everything else at the moment, I sometimes tune in to Newsnight and expect to see him as a guest, or even the presenter...

They should name it the Royal Light(weight) Entertainment Show.
Dancc
21-02-2011
Just noticed how poorly MOTD did last night, in stark contrast to its mega OMG ratings of recent weeks. On the face of it an odd decision to show a movie premiere on Two and move it to One last night when there were no real high-profile fixtures on in the Premier League.
RobbieSykes123
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by chris_bauer:
“Why did you dislike it so much? Was it just because it is ITV?

I thought it was a pretty well made piece of drama, as was Upstairs Downstairs. I think it's good for the television industry that a period drama can appeal to a mass audience, means more drama being commissioned and risks taken.”

Where did I say I disliked Downton?

I thought it was ok, didn't really see what all the fuss was about, but it was certainly a good effort and nice to see ITV attempting that sort of thing again.
RobbieSykes123
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by Dancc:
“Just noticed how poorly MOTD did last night, in stark contrast to its mega OMG ratings of recent weeks. On the face of it an odd decision to show a movie premiere on Two and move it to One last night when there were no real high-profile fixtures on.”

It was the first time I recall it being moved when BBC2 didn't have some other sporting commitment at the same time (eg, snooker). I suspect they'd scheduled the film for last night, knowing there were no PL fixtures expected this weekend due to the FA Cup, then WBA/Wolves rescheduled a postponed fixture, and the late slot on BBC1 was the only place left for the highlights.
D.M.N.
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by Dancc:
“Just noticed how poorly MOTD did last night, in stark contrast to its mega OMG ratings of recent weeks. On the face of it an odd decision to show a movie premiere on Two and move it to One last night when there were no real high-profile fixtures on.”

There was only one Premiership game over the weekend - West Brom vs Wolves - unless you were a fan of either team, you wouldn't have cared about MOTD last night.
Dancc
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by RobbieSykes123:
“It was the first time I recall it being moved when BBC2 didn't have some other sporting commitment at the same time (eg, snooker). I suspect they'd scheduled the film for last night, knowing there were no PL fixtures expected this weekend due to the FA Cup, then WBA/Wolves rescheduled a postponed fixture, and the late slot on BBC1 was the only place left for the highlights.”

I see. Makes sense now, thanks.

Still, it just about beat the FA Cup highlights programme on ITV1 according to Bushmills.
Salv*
21-02-2011
Anyone have all the first week ratings of OK TV?
sugapunk
21-02-2011
Originally Posted by mlt11:
“I think we're starting to see the impact of the 20% spending cuts at the BBC over the next few years.

If someone else (ie primarily ITV or Sky) makes a substantial bid for Event X - which would mean the BBC needing to pay a lot more for Event X than it does at present - then the BBC is going to find it almost impossible to justify doing so at the same time as it is making substantial redundancies and renegotiating the pay deals of top stars downwards.

Up to now there's been quite a bit of talk about cuts but we've not really actually seen that feeding through on screen. I think this is now going to start happening.”

Event X will be televised anyway, so this is a good thing as it should mean more of the license fee getting spent on new programming that otherwise wouldn't exist.
Dancc
21-02-2011
Some amazing growth for NCIS in the officials.

Wednesday 2nd February: 1,745,000
Wednesday 9th February: 2,708,000

Up 55% week-on-week.
Charnham
21-02-2011
Having never seen the Royal Variety, I find it ideal programming of ITV 1, to say nothing of the fact it involves a winner from one of there rubbish saturday night reality shows.
Georged123
21-02-2011
Losing the RVP is probably not something the BBC welcomed but it depends what figure ITV is paying for it. In a time of deep cuts at the BBC, I dont think paying loads for a show that basically just boosts album/dvd sales for entertainers just before Christmas should be a priority.

Originally Posted by mlt11:
“Yes, but a lot of the BBC's costs are fairly fixed - all the infrastucture, buildings, studios etc etc.

At a time of cuts it's the discretionary items that come under pressure. If they are asked to pay a lot more for something - whether it's US Masters golf, the Royal Variety (and who knows F1 or Six Nations in a couple of years time) it's very hard to justify spending a lot more on something when overall you are making significant cuts.

Because if they do spend more anywhere, then the cuts in other areas have to be even steeper.”

From a programming perspective I think the cuts have already begun. 3 part series seem to be replacing 6 part series as the cost and risk is becoming too much. Sherlock, Wallender, Zen, South Riding, George Gently (just 2 episodes per series) are examples of this.

From a sports programming perspective I think the BBC will make an effort to keep Six Nations, F1, Wimbledon, Football Tournaments, Olympics but everything else could be up for grabs and I cant see them poaching anything.
Georged123
21-02-2011
Back to ratings, fantastic for South Riding. I expected it to be lucky to push over 5m. Good rating for a brilliant Being Human episode too

Rzt - do you have the rating for the late night Being Human repeat at 11:30pm?
<<
<
48 of 122
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map