The Ratings Thread (Part 68)

323 of 877

Barkers_Nipple

09-10-2016

Strictly will only go from strength to strength this year because they haven't really got those 5/6 dancers who are just average who people don't really care if they go. In fact considering it's week three I think tonight's eviction could be a bit of a shock.

X Factor I was bored with .. only knew two of the songs!

derek500

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by A.D.P:
“The eX Factor is now dead in the water, only the die hard fans sticking with it.”

So over a third of people watching TV at nine are 'die hard fans'?

ITV will be pleased with that.

derek500

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by Barkers_Nipple:
“Strictly will only go from strength to strength this year because they haven't really got those 5/6 dancers who are just average who people don't really care if they go. In fact considering it's week three I think tonight's eviction could be a bit of a shock.
”

Shame there's not a 'spoiler' thread for the lottery!!

cylon6

09-10-2016

I thought Strictly would have suffered more with the longer X Factor clash. A very good rating. X Factor will be higher next week away from a long clash. Is 7m likely?

Andy23

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by H of De Vil:
“Ah well there you go. What way to piss off any lead in. Put a rpt of YBF on before TXF. Numpties.
”

With a lead in of 20 mins of analysis and 15 mins of news, and up against one of the biggest shows on TV, what would you have put on in a 30 min slot that would have got 4m?

I doubt anything would have got anymore than about 500k higher in such a situation.

Quote:
“But I suspect it was the choice of acts that put pay to a low rating for TXF. Had they been less about joke acts and serious singers, it might have been much closer to 7m.”

It's such a shame you aren't running ITV as you seem to know exactly why all the different shows aren't getting the ratings you want. If they'd have put on just good singers it's obvious it would have beaten Strictly.

cylon6

09-10-2016

No X Factor clash for the Strictly results show tonight so the Strictly results show should have a similar rating to Saturday.

Strictly feels like a real competition already this year and you don't want to see people go unlike at this stage in previous years.

Score

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by Andy23:
“With a lead in of 20 mins of analysis and 15 mins of news, and up against one of the biggest shows on TV, what would you have put on in a 30 min slot that would have got 4m?

I doubt anything would have got anymore than about 500k higher in such a situation.

It's such a shame you aren't running ITV as you seem to know exactly why all the different shows aren't getting the ratings you want. If they'd have put on just good singers it's obvious it would have beaten Strictly.”

They should have just put X Factor on after the football. I doubt it would have been much (if at all) lower than it was at 8pm with that inheritance. It feels like Meet The Parents is doomed before it starts, which is a shame as it sounds on paper like a fun format, but it doesn't stand a chance sadly.

Yes, I can't imagine X Factor would have been much higher with serious singers only. I can't say there was anyone from the auditions who I desperately missed.

LHolmes

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by A.D.P:
“44 % for SCD is on fire, as predicted it won the clash comprehensively. The eX Factor is now dead in the water, only the die hard fans sticking with it. Its indefensible now and the press is having a field day on the cock ups. Drunk or apparently drunk judges, Louis rude to Dermot, issues on contestants where insufficient background checks were made. Cut the judges pay by £100k each and pay for ten researchers on £40k each to actually check into the backgrounds, the issue is the show is milked of all finances by bloated judges pay.”

Just read about that on The Sun website. Terrible.

Hardly surprising they don't run bg checks on the contestants though. ITV can't even be arsed to request to see a form of ID before enlisting an actor's services for Corrie, this coming to light after they employed a 25 year old to play 14 year old Bethany Platt.

northlad

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by A.D.P:
“44 % for SCD is on fire, as predicted it won the clash comprehensively. The eX Factor is now dead in the water, only the die hard fans sticking with it. Its indefensible now and the press is having a field day on the cock ups. Drunk or apparently drunk judges, Louis rude to Dermot, issues on contestants where insufficient background checks were made. Cut the judges pay by £100k each and pay for ten researchers on £40k each to actually check into the backgrounds, the issue is the show is milked of all finances by bloated judges pay.”

I wouldnt watch it if I was you,as you seem not to like it.

H of De Vil

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by derek500:
“Ad breaks and punditry don't keep viewers.”

That's true, but a more attractive programme at 7.30pm might have kept more and helped TXF out a bit better than a YBF rpt.

Even if ITV pulled TXF forward to the end of the football, viewers would have had more reason to stick around.

lewiep93

09-10-2016

5 minute breakdown:

Code:

Time	BBC 1		ITV (inc. +1)
17:00	933.6k (7.7%)	3.84m (31.6%)
17:05	912.9k (7.3%)	4.31m (34.3%)
17:10	993.8k (7.7%)	4.64m (35.9%)
17:15	1.06m (8.0%)	4.80m (36.0%)
17:20	1.16m (8.5%)	4.98m (36.3%)
17:25	1.34m (9.7%)	5.28m (38.0%)
17:30	1.62m (11.4%)	5.50m (38.5%)
17:35	1.93m (13.1%)	5.59m (37.8%)
17:40	2.14m (14.2%)	5.73m (38.1%)
17:45	2.52m (16.7%)	5.55m (36.8%)
17:50	2.64m (17.3%)	5.04m (33.1%)
17:55	2.59m (16.7%)	5.28m (34.0%)
18:00	2.82m (17.7%)	5.66m (35.5%)
18:05	3.04m (18.7%)	6.00m (37.0%)
18:10	3.21m (19.5%)	6.12m (37.2%)
18:15	3.38m (20.1%)	6.22m (36.9%)
18:20	3.49m (20.5%)	6.25m (36.6%)
18:25	3.84m (22.4%)	6.32m (36.8%)
18:30	4.17m (23.8%)	6.49m (37.1%)
18:35	4.39m (24.6%)	6.49m (36.4%)
18:40	4.68m (25.7%)	6.55m (35.9%)
18:45	6.46m (33.1%)	6.22m (31.8%)
18:50	7.89m (40.4%)	4.42m (22.7%)
18:55	8.85m (44.9%)	3.52m (17.8%)
19:00	9.09m (46.8%)	3.05m (15.7%)
19:05	9.49m (48.0%)	2.60m (13.1%)
19:10	9.98m (49.6%)	2.47m (12.3%)
19:15	9.98m (49.6%)	2.26m (11.3%)
19:20	10.15m (50.1%)	2.18m (10.8%)
19:25	10.41m (51.0%)	2.25m (11.0%)
19:30	10.40m (50.6%)	1.98m (9.7%)
19:35	10.44m (50.1%)	2.00m (9.6%)
19:40	10.40m (49.4%)	2.20m (10.5%)
19:45	10.33m (48.7%)	2.29m (10.8%)
19:50	10.58m (48.8%)	2.46m (11.3%)
19:55	10.28m (48.1%)	2.81m (13.1%)
20:00	10.04m (44.3%)	5.26m (23.2%)
20:05	9.77m (41.8%)	6.08m (26.0%)
20:10	9.73m (41.8%)	6.22m (26.7%)
20:15	9.95m (42.1%)	6.37m (26.9%)
20:20	9.71m (43.4%)	5.03m (22.5%)
20:25	9.57m (40.6%)	6.55m (27.8%)
20:30	9.81m (41.5%)	6.49m (27.5%)
20:35	9.71m (41.8%)	6.16m (26.5%)
20:40	9.44m (41.8%)	5.53m (24.5%)
20:45	7.60m (34.1%)	6.89m (30.9%)
20:50	4.09m (21.1%)	5.78m (29.9%)
20:55	3.45m (17.0%)	7.24m (35.6%)
21:00	3.27m (16.1%)	7.25m (35.6%)
21:05	3.31m (16.7%)	6.52m (32.9%)
21:10	3.35m (17.0%)	6.05m (30.8%)
21:15	3.33m (16.3%)	6.93m (33.9%)
21:20	3.42m (16.5%)	7.20m (34.8%)
21:25	3.35m (17.0%)	5.85m (29.6%)
21:30	3.36m (16.5%)	6.54m (32.1%)
21:35	3.17m (15.3%)	6.89m (33.3%)
21:40	3.44m (17.4%)	5.31m (26.9%)
21:45	3.54m (17.0%)	6.65m (31.8%)
21:50	3.67m (18.2%)	5.84m (28.9%)
21:55	3.90m (20.4%)	4.47m (23.4%)
22:00	4.07m (22.6%)	2.90m (16.1%)
22:05	4.16m (23.6%)	2.35m (13.3%)
22:10	4.11m (23.7%)	2.18m (12.6%)
22:15	4.16m (24.3%)	1.94m (11.3%)
22:20	4.19m (24.3%)	1.88m (10.9%)
22:25	4.09m (24.3%)	1.91m (11.4%)
22:30	3.44m (22.4%)	1.84m (12.0%)
22:35	3.52m (23.5%)	2.03m (13.6%)
22:40	3.38m (22.9%)	2.05m (13.9%)
22:45	3.00m (21.3%)	1.91m (13.6%)
22:50	1.76m (13.4%)	1.96m (14.9%)
22:55	1.53m (12.1%)	2.17m (17.1%)
23:00	1.47m (12.5%)	2.02m (17.1%)
23:05	1.53m (13.6%)	2.08m (18.5%)
23:10	1.52m (14.3%)	2.10m (19.7%)
23:15	1.51m (14.9%)	1.75m (17.2%)
23:20	1.37m (13.8%)	1.86m (18.8%)
23:25	1.38m (14.5%)	1.64m (17.3%)

Markynotts

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by H of De Vil:
“That's true, but a more attractive programme at 7.30pm might have kept more and helped TXF out a bit better than a YBF rpt.

Even if ITV pulled TXF forward to the end of the football, viewers would have had more reason to stick around.”

Was it a football match where extra time could have been involved ? Just wondering if their thought process was to have a 30 minute slot which could be dropped just in case, allowing TXF to stay in place.

david_leeward

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by AcerBen:
“Really disappointed they've axed Chatty Man. It was a ridiculous decision to move it to Thursdays though. They should've just moved it back to Friday and perhaps tried it at 9 or 9.30 instead, so there'd be no overlap with Norton. Didn't it average about 1.5m in the overnights on a Friday? That's about par for the course for Channel 4 isn't it?

Also thought it would make more sense if they had it on when Norton's taking a break, i.e. all summer.

Don't like the sound of his 8pm show. He's funniest when he's filthy.”

Chatty man died along time ago im afraid, even graham norton for me is a bit stale.

H of De Vil

09-10-2016

I would have pulled TXF forward and taken the clash head on. TXF has done this before and rated well. It might not have been too much higher than last night, although even if it was, it would have at least been starting 10minutes into SCD and not 1hr or so.

Where did I say if they put on good singers it would have beaten SCD? Clearly picking some joke acts pissed off many people. Who's to say they chose not to watch the Live shows because of this?

Only a couple of weeks ago TXF hit a 10m consolidated peak. They had the audience willing to return.

Dan R

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by Chris1964:
“Real performance show fatigue there for XF. Strictly will have hurt XF and once again dire surrounding shows on ITV, but the publics appetite for spending the non business end of this kind of talent format is being stretched. This is a post audition Voice style rating and the Voice spends a much reduced time doing this process.”

No, a Voice style number would be 4 million.
With an unprecedented SCD clash that number is OK.

Aaron_2015

09-10-2016

Absolutely staggering to see how much damage You've Been Framed did to the numbers at 7:30. ITV had a very strong afternoon/evening, then YBF lost ALL momentum gained, leaving X Factor with an awful 2 million lead in.

Chris1964

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by Markynotts:
“Was it a football match where extra time could have been involved ? Just wondering if their thought process was to have a 30 minute slot which could be dropped just in case, allowing TXF to stay in place.”

No it was a World Cup qualifier, there is no extra time.

ITV will have a rare Tuesday next week as there is another game and more meaningful opposition.

Andy23

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by H of De Vil:
“I would have pulled TXF forward and taken the clash head on. TXF has done this before and rated well. It might not have been too much higher than last night, although even if it was, it would have at least been starting 10minutes into SCD and not 1hr or so.

Where did I say if they put on good singers it would have beaten SCD? Clearly picking some joke acts pissed off many people. Who's say they chose not to watch the Live shows because of this.

Only a couple of weeks ago TXF hit a 10m consolidated peak. They had the audience willing to return.”

There is no way in a million years ITV moving The X Factor to start at 7:30 and instigating a 80 min clash would have been accepted as the logical decision here. They would have been branded as idiots who got what they deserved due to terrible scheduling.

So many contradictions here from one week to the next. If ITV do A it's obvious they should do B. If ITV do B they should do A. If they do A and B it's obviously due to the lead in from C or the content or the producer or something else obvious.

LHolmes

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by cylon6:
“I thought Strictly would have suffered more with the longer X Factor clash. A very good rating. X Factor will be higher next week away from a long clash. Is 7m likely?”

It's come to something that 7m with the hour later repeat is something to hope for in XF's case.

It's a shame that this series has turned into the usual circus, ditching talent for joke acts and bringing back acts who were rejected and so forth. At least that's what it sounds like as I switched off at the Six Chair Challenge, which I have never liked, after giving the auditions a chance because of the praise they were getting.

Might've come back if I hadn't heard about what's gone down since. Although I don't know how long I'd have lasted. Generally I cba with both and SCD is the better show. It's a shame for XF that it couldn't maintain the quality of the audition rounds though as one ep ended up over 10m in the officials. They always have to spoil it. Or maybe as others have said viewers are just bored of singing shows now beyond the audition rounds and it will always go down whatever happens.

Andy23

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by Aaron_2015:
“Absolutely staggering to see how much damage You've Been Framed did to the numbers at 7:30. ITV had a very strong afternoon/evening, then YBF lost ALL momentum gained, leaving X Factor with an awful 2 million lead in.”

If the high rating had continued all the way through the analysis, all the way through the news, and then dropped sharply at 7:30 you'd have a point, but I can't see that in the breakdown above.

They had 2.6m at 7:05pm when the analysis was going on.
They had 2.2m during the ITV News
They had about 2.2m during YBF.

The drop in momentum was due to the football having finished. The only way they would have fixed that would have been if they'd have started The X Factor at 6:55 the minute after the final whistle.

H of De Vil

09-10-2016

This.

Personally I would have pulled TXF forward. If the BBC was a big clash, call their bluff. The football finished at 7pm I think. Cut the commentary 5 minutes or so. Start TXF at 7.10pm, allowing only a 20 minute head start for SCD.

From the breakdown SCD started its mammoth growth at the point YBF came on air (with a 50% peak share).

I am pretty certain TXF would be no lower with a full head on clash, even bigger than 50minutes.

cylon6

09-10-2016

Originally Posted by Andy23:
“There is no way in a million years ITV moving The X Factor to start at 7:30 and instigating a 80 min clash would have been accepted as the logical decision here. They would have been branded as idiots who got what they deserved due to terrible scheduling.

So many contradictions here from one week to the next. If ITV do A it's obvious they should do B. If ITV do B they should do A. If they do A and B it's obviously due to the lead in from C or the content or the producer or something else obvious.”

That would have been insane for X Factor. Why make the the overlap longer when you can make it shorter and get more live viewers on the night? You only do that with X Factor from a position of strength.

lewiep93

09-10-2016

X Factor exc. +1 - 5.86m (27.4%)

AcerBen

09-10-2016

I wonder what would happen if they brought X Factor forward to start before SCD, like 6.15 or something? Would people stick with it and catch up with SCD or switch over the minute it started? Would be interesting to see.

Chris1964

09-10-2016

It does look better when its listed like that. The England game and XF make for a decent day even if they are both not firing on all cylinders. If they could choose the start time of the football they could probably better plan the schedule. Do away with YBF and shorten the post match(probably a lot of wishful thinking for ITV there). As it is the football has fed Strictly any of the Strictly inclined football audience on a plate, whilst the ITV audience has bombed.

323 of 877