|
||||||||
The Ratings Thread (Part 60) |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1001 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,429
|
Obviously BB will want England to lose as soon as possible
I don't know what the interest will be ratings wise on matches that England don't play?
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#1002 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wooler, Northumberlandiana
Posts: 21,728
|
BGT probably right down the middle of where most of us expected. Not quite the 'swoosh big red breaking news' that SamuelW reported but still....
BGT imo, needs a standout act, something that gets international buzz etc, yes those 2 kids turned up on Ellen but there was no real buzz around. Perhaps viewer fatigue, the schtick with Walliams is old, Holden is just generally unpopular and Cowell's routine is well...old and stage managed. He says something fairly on the mark and the audience in choreograph motion boo him and other judges dismiss him. Its effortlessly predictable. I think they key thing is talent, Il Divo lite just won it. I've been managing to get through BGT shows in about 20 mins via PVR, its not must watch anymore, its more - oh thats on |
|
|
|
#1003 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 30,195
|
Quote:
Indeed. Once you take into consideration the audience share for C5, things really aren't as dire as some might suggest. If BB was on BBC1 or ITV and had 900K then it would be disastrous, but it isn't. It is serving the audience who want to watch it well and is keeping C5's overall share at an acceptable level.
![]() When C5 signed up for BB weren't they seeking around 2m a night, advertisers will no doubt claw back money from the station due to the ratings not being as predicted. |
|
|
|
|
#1004 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 23,349
|
Quote:
So you predict it will bounce back to 1.4 - 1.5m tonight, interesting.
![]() Britain's Got Talent rated exactly as expected. Not sure what else there is to say, except the judges should be changed next year to try and manage the year on year decline. |
|
|
|
|
#1005 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 31,653
|
Quote:
Radio 3 probably gets a bigger audience and costs far less.
![]() When C5 signed up for BB weren't they seeking around 2m a night, advertisers will no doubt claw back money from the station due to the ratings not being as predicted. |
|
|
|
|
#1006 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 27,888
|
Quote:
Radio 3 probably gets a bigger audience and costs far less.
![]() When C5 signed up for BB weren't they seeking around 2m a night, advertisers will no doubt claw back money from the station due to the ratings not being as predicted. |
|
|
|
|
#1007 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 707
|
Quote:
To put a negative spin on a show that had over 50% audience share is, quite frankly, ludicrous.
![]() Quote:
Thanks, not shabby numbers at all for the football, still a good 5 million watching a midnight. The News rating at 01:00 is probably higher than the majority of their daytime line-up on Saturday too!
|
|
|
|
#1008 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 23,342
|
Quote:
Largely because it's incredibly boring once the auditions are over. I stop watching.
|
|
|
|
|
#1009 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 23,342
|
Quote:
Radio 3 probably gets a bigger audience and costs far less.
![]() When C5 signed up for BB weren't they seeking around 2m a night, advertisers will no doubt claw back money from the station due to the ratings not being as predicted. |
|
|
|
|
#1010 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 37,641
|
Quote:
The Voice isnt boring.
|
|
|
|
|
#1011 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 27,888
|
Quote:
The Radio 3 audience is tiny and costs ba fortune to run. They should have axed that instead of BBC3.
|
|
|
|
|
#1012 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 31,653
|
Quote:
It is the strangest format. A really popular start then viewers tune out and don't return for the final.
|
|
|
|
|
#1013 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wooler, Northumberlandiana
Posts: 21,728
|
Quote:
The Voice isnt boring. .
|
|
|
|
#1014 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: North East
Posts: 12,254
|
I can see BOTS being moved off the main channel soon in any cause, Could maybe work as a BBLB type show at 18:00 to 18:30 on a weekday on Five Star. I don't expect good ratings for it and they better off sticking a film on Channel 5 in that slot.
|
|
|
|
#1015 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 330
|
Quote:
More data needed. Obviously if the whole series were to be down this much from here on in then it's not looking good for BB but if it is going to crash I'd rather it be this year with the contract up for renewal as it puts C5 in a very strong position when it comes to renegotiating.
|
|
|
|
|
#1016 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 27,888
|
Quote:
The gimmick just wears off I think. The auditions are good but once the big spinning chairs go, the show really isn't much different from The X Factor and BGT which the original judges and hosts spent some time talking about negatively. The only difference to me is the show isn't produced as well and there are less live shows because the audience doesn't keep with it.
|
|
|
|
|
#1017 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 31,653
|
Quote:
The big difference is that viewers simply don't care about the contestants on The Voice. There's no chance for contestants to "sell" themselves to the viewers at home. I don't know the answer but if the viewers don't even get chance to engage with the people they're expected to vote for later on, then why bother? At least with XF and BGT, there is more after thought on the contestants that is virtually non existent on The Voice.
|
|
|
|
|
#1018 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wooler, Northumberlandiana
Posts: 21,728
|
Quote:
The big difference is that viewers simply don't care about the contestants on The Voice. There's no chance for contestants to "sell" themselves to the viewers at home. I don't know the answer but if the viewers don't even get chance to engage with the people they're expected to vote for later on, then why bother? At least with XF and BGT, there is more after thought on the contestants that is virtually non existent on The Voice.
Its a difficult balancing act for the BBC. Show the acts life and you get criticised for sob stories, don't show it and you've got nothing for the audience at home to engage with. But of course its not about the Voice beyond the blind stage. Its about who fits into the Coaches team and of course, the look. |
|
|
|
#1019 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 23,342
|
Quote:
The gimmick just wears off I think. The auditions are good but once the big spinning chairs go, the show really isn't much different from The X Factor and BGT which the original judges and hosts spent some time talking about negatively. The only difference to me is the show isn't produced as well and there are less live shows because the audience doesn't keep with it.
The Voice does enough for BBC1's whole evening but it will never reach series 1 highs again. |
|
|
|
|
#1020 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Cuddling MyLee
Posts: 4,732
|
The Voice is a load of codswallop. The only talent show not to produce any success and three rigged winners.
Ever thought the reality TV bubble is bursting? As for BBC saving money - why not scrap Asian Network? Surely integeration is the key? |
|
|
|
|
#1021 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,698
|
Quote:
The Radio 3 audience is tiny and costs ba fortune to run. They should have axed that instead of BBC3.
Radio Three - £38.3m content, £5.3m distribution, and £10.7m infrastructure support BBC Three - £89.7m content, £4.6m distribution, and £27.4m infrastructure support http://www.bbc.co.uk/annualreport/20...penditure.html |
|
|
|
|
#1022 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 27,888
|
Quote:
The Voice is a load of codswallop. The only talent show not to produce any success and three rigged winners.
Ever thought the reality TV bubble is bursting? As for BBC saving money - why not scrap Asian Network? Surely integeration is the key? |
|
|
|
|
#1023 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Cuddling MyLee
Posts: 4,732
|
Quote:
They were going to axe Asian Network. But then chickened out!
|
|
|
|
|
#1024 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 9,232
|
Quote:
H, you complain about Samuel spinning things, yet here you've created a Samuelesque post stating the obvious as if there is some kind of tsunami of talent shows across the spectrum and BGT is a triumph! There have been 2 haven't there? The Voice was respectable enough and was never going to beat BGT anyway, and BGT where predictability and the lack of anything else to watch meant it had another decent year. That's about it!
Quote:
This thread has never just been a ratings only thread. If it were we'd only be on part 3. What an incredibly dull and meaningless thread it would be if someone just posted ratings everyday and that was all!
There are far more ratings posted and ratings discussion in here than ever. Quite why someone who dislikes this thread wants to come in here just to moan I dont know. |
|
|
|
|
#1025 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 31,653
|
Quote:
I like watching The Voice but once the blind audition rounds end, the programme lacks that extra something when it goes live. For all of The X Factor's faults the final always seems like a a big deal unlike The Voice final.
The Voice does enough for BBC1's whole evening but it will never reach series 1 highs again. They do find very talented singers, but I don't think it's a show that warrants a recording contract as the prize. A Stars In Their Eyes type show with a cash prize for the winner would work as a show but by offering that record contract, it gives viewers a feeling the winner should be selling albums after it, which obviously none of the winners have done so far, which impacts on how the show does IMO. |
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:26.



I don't know what the interest will be ratings wise on matches that England don't play?


