BIB - really? I've been told to go away, been sworn at and seen posts expressing a hope I wouldn't post again. And that's your idea of "welcome"? But it isn't, because you add a "but". And I don't need you to tell me what adds something to the thread unless you're a moderator. It's not up to you to decide.

Regarding the second paragraph, I didn't mention any poster. I'm not sure where you get that impression.Don't put words into my mouth. I couldn't care less who's friends with who. I will post here when I want until a moderator tells me not to.

Yes they will, BARB updates in the morning - tomorrow is not a Bank Holiday so Attentional will tape-check tonight's ratings.

Oh my bad.

I thought if it was a bank holiday (like today), it meant ratings are tape-checked. Obviously not.

I think you're right that they won't be tape-checked. Just had a look at Easter Bank Holiday Monday overnights here and here and it seems like full-slot averages was used for that Bank Holiday Monday then - the two sets of 8.30pm Corrie figures matched on that day even though usually there's a difference due to tape-checking. So I expect full-slot overnights will be reported tomorrow too.

They shouldn't of even started


Corrie was still on When EastEnders started but then EastEnders also over ran by about 5mins(8:34 but started just before 8)

You should not be told to go away or sworn at, that is as disrespectful as some of your posts, and is not necessary. When a Charnham stated he was going to watch EastEnders, you made a derogitory comment against him. No, I'm not a moderator, but there are rules and they apply to both sides. I for one rarely agree with Charnham either, but he is not a rude poster, and you have been more than rude to him.


You started saying something about gangs while quoting a post I made to Robbie. I think it was a reasonable assumption to make, I am not putting words in your mouth! You keep posting, as you say, us mere posters can not stop you, but if you keep rubbing everyone up the wrong way, you will be on a lot of people's ignore lists...and this doesn't make someone 15 as you have previously commented.

As another poster has pointed out, there is also a ratings game thread which is worth a look if you are genuinely interested in ratings. You will also become very aware of posters having favourite channels and broadcasters on here, and the constant banter on ratings can be fun. But if you don't agree with someone, and most people on here have had their moments with each other, the worse thing you can do is go for a personal attack which is what you have done with posters not agreeing with the BBC's ratings headline. Don't do this, and people will not tell you to go away, swear at you etc. If they do, report them to the moderators...

It's hard to know where to start with a post like this. You seem to take pride in pointing out my typo, then make spelling mistakes yourself. You say I can post, then lecture me on the manner on which I am to post. You simply can't have it all ways.

Apparently my crime is "rubbing people up the wrong way" - well, that's your, and their, problem. This is a public forum and mentioning the word "us" does suggest a little clique who can and boldly gang up on somehow new who expresses different views.

I would have rather hoped for expression of the view that no-one should swear or tell others to go away, whatever else has been expressed. The fact you qualify your support for free speech is very interesting - probably more than you realise.

As for your phrase "if you are genuinely interested in ratings" - it would be hilarious if it weren't so judgemental. Do only those qualified in ratings find acceptance? It is - as I have found myself repeating after being told this and that about what I may and may not say - a public forum. I don't need a lecture - and you are in no place to do proffer one.

Just because they are not automatically bundled in like +1 figures sometimes are it doesn't mean we should ignore a sizeable chunk of a programme's audience.

That will really dent the Corrie full-slot average then for tomorrow especially as it finished at 20.55 too. Add to that it was up against Farewell Pat, it could be quite low indeed.

They didn't promote Farewell pat and they mentioned it half way through the theme tune(some may have turned to ITV as soon as the Duff,Duff went) and then of course the BEEB shown a few trailers before acting showing the special (which started late and finished late too)

To whom are you referring when you say "we"?

My point was about BBC News, which provides itself as being an independent news organisation and not a vessel for BBC self-promotion.

Regarding this forum, anything can be discussed. Free speech and all that.

In addition to the 8.30pm episode, Corrie's 7.30pm episode (and Emmerdale) might rate lower than they normally do during the first week of the year as they faced Indiana Jones 4 which I reckon would've averaged 5m+, tougher competition than usual.

Although in Scotland we've been subjected to Bolt and Comic Relief Best Bits instead.

Fantastic night for BBC1 last night and deservedly so both EastEnders and Sherlock were fantastic I thought. Indeed EastEnders was a dramatic improvement on the poor Christmas Day episodes.


Undoubtedly the numbers have proven to be great but I think the jury is still out on whether this has worked out for ITV. The real test will come Christmas 2012 and whether or not they can convince advertisers to bite on Christmas Day or not (and the impressive timeshift won't be a selling point there unfortunately). Its hard to believe ITV didn't lose money by airing Downton on Christmas Day, which is fine if its part of a long term strategy to make Christmas Day viable from an advertising perspective but if not then it was a spectacularly stupid thing to do.

The other issue is likely to be that I imagine BBC1 will have a stronger Christmas line-up next year. Personally I hope they don't lurch back to The Royale Family (this year proved they don't need it) and instead opt for something like a Miranda Christmas Special. Give something that's going to be on more than one day a year a chance to shine on the big day.

I hope EastEnders slammed Coronation Street in the ratings last night.

It has shown that it is a much stronger soap in comparison.

Roll on the ratings for tomorrow although I think Corrie will benefit from Being on before EastEnders.

I was going to break down your post argument by argument, but I really can not be bothered to get into the fact that I never claimed my spelling was perfect - so I don't point out other people's spelling mistakes either etc...

I was trying to be helpful, extend an olive branch if you will. I am not judging or lecturing you, and you can make what you want of my post, it's your choice.

Doesn't it just seem a bit strange to you that all the regular posters on this thread, many on opposing sides, have all been united in arguing with you on here at come point?

Arguable to say the least; EastEnders has a big storyline ongoing at the moment so of course it's going to appear better than Coronation Street.

Does anyone have the rating for Adele Live last night? I tried to look through the thread but could not see it?

Also, I gather Downton beat EE in the final ratings, although obviously good for ITV; does it also not show that with better scheduling they could have achieved a much better overnight rating- which is surely what advertisers would want?

I saw advertising for Celebrity Big Brother after Countdown on Channel 4. The one with Shaun Williamson getting told no he can't be on it. And then a little after that in the same ad break the one with Brian and former housemates.

Channel 5 splashing the marketing cash again. Has anyone else spotted them on other channels today?

Ah yeah thats true. The first Monday in January is often a high rated one for the soaps, but looks like the trend could be reversed when the ratings come in tomorrow. However, most films have rated below expectations over the festive period IMO so you never know...

EastEnders has one big storyline after the other before March.

I don't believe it was stupid, as they must have made money from Downton on Xmas day? There were still 35 mins of advertisements with each one seeming to average around 7million viewers. I would imagine this raised the £2m needed to fund the episode. A previous working out seemed to be that £5m was probably paid out to advertise during/around Downton on Xmas Day.

Yes, they could possibly have made more revenue back on another Sunday, but they would have already made money on the previous Sunday where Christmas Day is probably not one of the most profitable for the past few years...

I imagine the point was that if you wish to continue to discuss ratings with posters in this thread then you should probably be a little more respectful of said posters otherwise they'll simply ignore you. I suspect you'll also find that if you're less argumentative and aggressive in your posting style that you'll find others will be more friendly toward you as well.

Is it not pro-rata?

The more people that watch an advert, the more money the advertiser has to pay?

I think ITV is to be applauded for trying something different. I think they took a risk and probably won't see the financial benefit, which is important to any business in these times. It's a shame the rest of ITV's holiday line-up was so uninspired.

The BBC has a stronger Christmas day line-up with audience favourites across the evening but they maybe should try to vary their lineup some years. I could pretty much write their schedule now....

I don't watch TV on Christmas Day but a lot of people do and it would be good to have a different line-up. Why couldn't they have scheduled Great Expectations or Lost Christmas? taken a risk themselves?