Originally Posted by Dan R:
“So much for that 12m
”
“So much for that 12m
”
Yeah. It's only ahead of X Factor and has a chance of finishing ahead of Britain's Got Talent in consolidated. Strictly has had worse days.
The Ratings Thread (Part 68)
713 of 877
Yeah. It's only ahead of X Factor and has a chance of finishing ahead of Britain's Got Talent in consolidated. Strictly has had worse days.
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“So much for that 12m ”
“So much for that 12m
”
Are you for real? I watched both the X-Factor Final and the SCD final. ( Iwas forced to watch TXF due to staying with my sister last weekend as I was delivering her presents). The difference in the feel of both shows was collossal. The production values in SCD instantly make it a warmer, friendlier and cheerier show. The bonding between contestants is real, the judges, though occasionally harsh, are sincere and the live music is out of this world. There are no booming voice overs that declare "KYLIE MINOUGUE" is to perform in unison with big American style writing that appears on screen, and there was so much happening on screen in the two hours and 15 minutes compared to endless padding that filled much of the XF's four hour time slots.
I can see exactly why SCD continues to be a massive success and why TXF is dwindling. One is dull, one is pure entertainment.
Originally Posted by cylon6:
“Yeah. It's only ahead of X Factor and has a chance of finishing ahead of Britain's Got Talent in consolidated. Strictly has had worse days.”
“Yeah. It's only ahead of X Factor and has a chance of finishing ahead of Britain's Got Talent in consolidated. Strictly has had worse days.”
It could very well get over 13m in the officials, best rating in four years!
Originally Posted by Aaron_2015:
“It's on so often, I can remember it only being shown a couple of months ago. Was nice to see LOTR though.
Strictly/McIntyre was clever scheduling, and it's worked well for the Beeb.”
“It's on so often, I can remember it only being shown a couple of months ago. Was nice to see LOTR though.
Strictly/McIntyre was clever scheduling, and it's worked well for the Beeb.”
Yes McIntyre has performed like Merlin did, although that was in a sandwich iirc. ITV basically gave up, but it was still a storming night for BBC1 and it was a great send off for Len who was such a find for the show at the start. Not many decisions have been needed over 10 years plus on SCD, so it wont quite be like putting on a comfy pair of slippers next time for the viewers. Interesting to see who they choose and how the panel dynamics alter.
Originally Posted by Hassaan13:
“Strictly Come Dancing: 11.83m (53.5%)
* 15-minute peak: 12.79m (56.9%) at 20:30
Full round-up coming up...”
“Strictly Come Dancing: 11.83m (53.5%)
* 15-minute peak: 12.79m (56.9%) at 20:30
Full round-up coming up...”
Good figure considering the World and his aunt seemed to be out partying last night
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“Are you for real? I watched both the X-Factor Final and the SCD final. ( Iwas forced to watch TXF due to staying with my sister last weekend as I was delivering her presents). The difference in the feel of both shows was collossal. The production values in SCD instantly make it a warmer, friendlier and cheerier show. The bonding between contestants is real, the judges, though occasionally harsh, are sincere and the live music is out of this world. There are no booming voice overs that declare "KYLIE MINOUGUE" is to perform in unison with big American style writing that appears on screen, and there was so much happening on screen in the two hours and 15 minutes compared to endless padding that filled much of the XF's four hour time slots.
I can see exactly why SCD continues to be a massive success and why TXF is dwindling. One is dull, one is pure entertainment.”
“Are you for real? I watched both the X-Factor Final and the SCD final. ( Iwas forced to watch TXF due to staying with my sister last weekend as I was delivering her presents). The difference in the feel of both shows was collossal. The production values in SCD instantly make it a warmer, friendlier and cheerier show. The bonding between contestants is real, the judges, though occasionally harsh, are sincere and the live music is out of this world. There are no booming voice overs that declare "KYLIE MINOUGUE" is to perform in unison with big American style writing that appears on screen, and there was so much happening on screen in the two hours and 15 minutes compared to endless padding that filled much of the XF's four hour time slots.
I can see exactly why SCD continues to be a massive success and why TXF is dwindling. One is dull, one is pure entertainment.”
The best way to describe this is from a quote I read earlier this year. Strictly have fun on their show, The X Factor keep telling you they're having fun
Monster night for BBC. Felt like old school Saturday night with how warm it is
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“Are you for real? I watched both the X-Factor Final and the SCD final. ( Iwas forced to watch TXF due to staying with my sister last weekend as I was delivering her presents). The difference in the feel of both shows was collossal. The production values in SCD instantly make it a warmer, friendlier and cheerier show. The bonding between contestants is real, the judges, though occasionally harsh, are sincere and the live music is out of this world. There are no booming voice overs that declare "KYLIE MINOUGUE" is to perform in unison with big American style writing that appears on screen, and there was so much happening on screen in the two hours and 15 minutes compared to endless padding that filled much of the XF's four hour time slots.
I can see exactly why SCD continues to be a massive success and why TXF is dwindling. One is dull, one is pure entertainment.”
“Are you for real? I watched both the X-Factor Final and the SCD final. ( Iwas forced to watch TXF due to staying with my sister last weekend as I was delivering her presents). The difference in the feel of both shows was collossal. The production values in SCD instantly make it a warmer, friendlier and cheerier show. The bonding between contestants is real, the judges, though occasionally harsh, are sincere and the live music is out of this world. There are no booming voice overs that declare "KYLIE MINOUGUE" is to perform in unison with big American style writing that appears on screen, and there was so much happening on screen in the two hours and 15 minutes compared to endless padding that filled much of the XF's four hour time slots.
I can see exactly why SCD continues to be a massive success and why TXF is dwindling. One is dull, one is pure entertainment.”
You mean the 'production values' where XF plays to an arena of 10000 per night and makes its finals feel like an event, compared to SCD where it puts comparatively minimal effort in?
The way this thread jerks off to SCD is shocking. You'd think it had just created world peace or something.
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“You mean the 'production values' where XF plays to an arena of 10000 per night and makes its finals feel like an event, compared to SCD where it puts comparatively minimal effort in?
The way this thread jerks off to SCD is shocking. You'd think it had just created world peace or something.”
“You mean the 'production values' where XF plays to an arena of 10000 per night and makes its finals feel like an event, compared to SCD where it puts comparatively minimal effort in?
The way this thread jerks off to SCD is shocking. You'd think it had just created world peace or something.”
The toys are well and truly out of the pram. Dan, it's not difficult to work out why SCD gets praise. I'm not a fan of the show and I don't watch it, but when I see a rating like that I think it's brilliant. I don't care about the winner, which judge left or who did the best tango, I just recognise a good rating.
You on the other hand, try to desperately find criticisms. X Factor will never catch up with Strictly again. Why don't you just accept the two are in a different league?
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“You mean the 'production values' where XF plays to an arena of 10000 per night and makes its finals feel like an event, compared to SCD where it puts comparatively minimal effort in?
The way this thread jerks off to SCD is shocking. You'd think it had just created world peace or something.”
“You mean the 'production values' where XF plays to an arena of 10000 per night and makes its finals feel like an event, compared to SCD where it puts comparatively minimal effort in?
The way this thread jerks off to SCD is shocking. You'd think it had just created world peace or something.”
SCD bores me to tears but I have to agree that the production values on the show are incredible. You cannot say they put minimal effort in. The screen comes alive with colour!
From rzt:
The 1-minute peak for Strictly Come Dancing was 13.62m (58.8%) at 20:49!
The show had a reach of 15.56m.
Here's how SCD audience demos were:
C4-15: 910k (46.2%)
16-34: 1.17m (38.1%)
35-44: 1.16m (46.9%)
45-54: 1.84m (50.9%)
55-64: 2.21m (56.6%)
A65+: 4.54m (63.9%)
62.3% of SCD's audience were female. 6.95m of its audience were ABC1s.
The 1-minute peak for Strictly Come Dancing was 13.62m (58.8%) at 20:49!
The show had a reach of 15.56m.
Here's how SCD audience demos were:
C4-15: 910k (46.2%)
16-34: 1.17m (38.1%)
35-44: 1.16m (46.9%)
45-54: 1.84m (50.9%)
55-64: 2.21m (56.6%)
A65+: 4.54m (63.9%)
62.3% of SCD's audience were female. 6.95m of its audience were ABC1s.
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“You mean the 'production values' where XF plays to an arena of 10000 per night and makes its finals feel like an event, compared to SCD where it puts comparatively minimal effort in?”
“You mean the 'production values' where XF plays to an arena of 10000 per night and makes its finals feel like an event, compared to SCD where it puts comparatively minimal effort in?”
Minimal effort? I'd say producing a live show in front of thousands, where the turnover of dancers and routines inside a 90 minute show is flawless, is hardly putting in minimal effort.
Originally Posted by Aaron_2015:
“You on the other hand, try to desperately find criticisms. X Factor will never catch up with Strictly again. Why don't you just accept the two are in a different league?”
“You on the other hand, try to desperately find criticisms. X Factor will never catch up with Strictly again. Why don't you just accept the two are in a different league?”
I actually accepted this about 3 years ago, which is why I call for comparisons to stop. Look at each show on theur individual merit.
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“Are you for real? I watched both the X-Factor Final and the SCD final. ( Iwas forced to watch TXF due to staying with my sister last weekend as I was delivering her presents). The difference in the feel of both shows was collossal. The production values in SCD instantly make it a warmer, friendlier and cheerier show. The bonding between contestants is real, the judges, though occasionally harsh, are sincere and the live music is out of this world. There are no booming voice overs that declare "KYLIE MINOUGUE" is to perform in unison with big American style writing that appears on screen, and there was so much happening on screen in the two hours and 15 minutes compared to endless padding that filled much of the XF's four hour time slots.
I can see exactly why SCD continues to be a massive success and why TXF is dwindling. One is dull, one is pure entertainment.”
“Are you for real? I watched both the X-Factor Final and the SCD final. ( Iwas forced to watch TXF due to staying with my sister last weekend as I was delivering her presents). The difference in the feel of both shows was collossal. The production values in SCD instantly make it a warmer, friendlier and cheerier show. The bonding between contestants is real, the judges, though occasionally harsh, are sincere and the live music is out of this world. There are no booming voice overs that declare "KYLIE MINOUGUE" is to perform in unison with big American style writing that appears on screen, and there was so much happening on screen in the two hours and 15 minutes compared to endless padding that filled much of the XF's four hour time slots.
I can see exactly why SCD continues to be a massive success and why TXF is dwindling. One is dull, one is pure entertainment.”
I agree. I don't think there has ever been a warmer more inviting show than SCD in UK tv history. Together with ITT you can, if you want, become wholly submerged in it. October and November are hard months sometimes but its something to link the weeks up to Christmas whilst marking/noting occasions like Halloween/Bonfire Night/Remembrance in varying ways-and also ofcourse the Blackpool week.
Clearly everyone who is involved with it is bonded to it like a giant family and with the sole intention of producing the best show possible, and the same time inviting everyone else in to join the party. A true modern success story.
at the Strictly come Dancing figure! Astonding average and a peak only bettered by one show. A vintage series I think proving it is truly "Event Television"
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“The way this thread jerks off to SCD is shocking. You'd think it had just created world peace or something.”
“The way this thread jerks off to SCD is shocking. You'd think it had just created world peace or something.”
Substitute Strictly for Simon Cowell and you have some other people in this thread.
Everybody should just say Merry Christmas and have a mince pie in here.
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“I actually accepted this about 3 years ago, which is why I call for comparisons to stop. Look at each show on theur individual merit.”
“I actually accepted this about 3 years ago, which is why I call for comparisons to stop. Look at each show on theur individual merit.”
Well stop trying to criticise SCD then! Your criticisms of it are wholly driven by your attachment to X Factor. You yourself are comparing them. When you try and make a rating of nearly 12 million look bad, you just look stupid.
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“You mean the 'production values' where XF plays to an arena of 10000 per night and makes its finals feel like an event, compared to SCD where it puts comparatively minimal effort in?
.”
“You mean the 'production values' where XF plays to an arena of 10000 per night and makes its finals feel like an event, compared to SCD where it puts comparatively minimal effort in?
.”
Like so many of what you post that is just a joke. I recently saw on It Takes Two a clip of the first series of Strictly. It had practically non-existent staging, amateurish production values, and looked like it was coming from inside a broom cupboard . To say the show now makes minimal effort is proof that your comments in general can just be dismissed as delusional... or just rather poor trolling of this thread. Or desperate attention-seeking.
Saturday 17th December 2016 - Overnights
BBC One
16:00 - Final Score: 2.01m (15.1%)
17:30 - BBC News: 3.43m (20.8%)
17:50 - Pointless Celebrities: 5.13m (28.4%)
18:40 - Strictly Come Dancing: The Final: 11.83m (53.5%)
* 15-minute peak: 12.79m (56.9%) at 20:30
* 5-minute peak: 13.10m (57.8%) at 20:45
* 1-minute peak: 13.62m (58.8%) at 20:49
* reach: 15.56m
* up 0.8m vs last year's final
* most watched final since 2012
* second most non-sport broadcast of the year (overnights)
* C4-15: 910k (46.2%)
* 16-34: 1.17m (38.1%)
* 35-44: 1.16m (46.9%)
* 45-54: 1.84m (50.9%)
* 55-64: 2.21m (56.6%)
* 65+: 4.54m (63.9%)
* 62.3% of the audience were female
* 6.95m were ABC1's
20:55 - Michael McIntyre's Big Show: 7.04m (36.6%)
21:55 - BBC News: 5.58m (31.9%)
22:15 - The National Lottery Live: 3.88m (24.2%)
22:25 - Match of the Day: 3.41m (27.2%)
BBC Two
16:35 - FILM: Nativity 2: Danger in the Manger!: 1.32m (8.3%)
18:25 - Dad's Army: 1.23m (6.1%)
18:55 - Operation Snow Tiger: 0.80m (3.6%)
19:55 - Walt Disney - Part Two: 0.95m (4.2%)
20:55 - FILM: A Christmas Carol: 1.51m (8.2%)
22:25 - QI XL: 0.92m (6.4%)
ITV (inc +1)
16:15 - FILM: The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring: 1.57m (9.1%)
19:30 - FILM: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey: 1.54m (7.7%)
Channel 4 (inc +1)
17:05 - Ice Age: A Mammoth Christmas: 0.76m (5.0%)
17:40 - FILM: Arthur Christmas: 1.20m (6.1%)
21:00 - It Was Alright in the 1970s: 1.01m (5.3%)
22:00 - FILM: Escape Plan: 0.74m (6.0%)
Channel 5 (inc +1)
13:05 - FILM: Christmas Cookies: 0.61m (6.7%)
14:50 - FILM: Love Always, Santa: 0.76m (7.1%)
16:35 - FILM: Christmas Under Wraps: 0.97m (7.1%)
17:35 - 5 News Update: 0.97m (5.9%)
17:40 - FILM: Christmas Under Wraps: 1.01m (5.8%)
18:25 - FILM: Space Cowboys: 0.49m (2.3%)
19:25 - 5 News Update: 0.41m (1.9%)
19:30 - FILM: Space Cowboys: 0.53m (2.4%)
BBC Four
21:00 - Modus: 584k (3.0%)
21:45 - Modus: 524k (3.0%)
Primetime shares
BBC One: 44.5%
ITV: 6.3% (+1: 1.3%)
BBC Two: 5.7%
Channel 4: 3.1% (+1: 0.9%)
Channel 5: 2.1% (+1: 0.2%)
BBC One vs ITV - 5-minute breakdown
BBC One
16:00 - Final Score: 2.01m (15.1%)
17:30 - BBC News: 3.43m (20.8%)
17:50 - Pointless Celebrities: 5.13m (28.4%)
18:40 - Strictly Come Dancing: The Final: 11.83m (53.5%)
* 15-minute peak: 12.79m (56.9%) at 20:30
* 5-minute peak: 13.10m (57.8%) at 20:45
* 1-minute peak: 13.62m (58.8%) at 20:49
* reach: 15.56m
* up 0.8m vs last year's final
* most watched final since 2012
* second most non-sport broadcast of the year (overnights)
* C4-15: 910k (46.2%)
* 16-34: 1.17m (38.1%)
* 35-44: 1.16m (46.9%)
* 45-54: 1.84m (50.9%)
* 55-64: 2.21m (56.6%)
* 65+: 4.54m (63.9%)
* 62.3% of the audience were female
* 6.95m were ABC1's
20:55 - Michael McIntyre's Big Show: 7.04m (36.6%)
21:55 - BBC News: 5.58m (31.9%)
22:15 - The National Lottery Live: 3.88m (24.2%)
22:25 - Match of the Day: 3.41m (27.2%)
BBC Two
16:35 - FILM: Nativity 2: Danger in the Manger!: 1.32m (8.3%)
18:25 - Dad's Army: 1.23m (6.1%)
18:55 - Operation Snow Tiger: 0.80m (3.6%)
19:55 - Walt Disney - Part Two: 0.95m (4.2%)
20:55 - FILM: A Christmas Carol: 1.51m (8.2%)
22:25 - QI XL: 0.92m (6.4%)
ITV (inc +1)
16:15 - FILM: The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring: 1.57m (9.1%)
19:30 - FILM: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey: 1.54m (7.7%)
Channel 4 (inc +1)
17:05 - Ice Age: A Mammoth Christmas: 0.76m (5.0%)
17:40 - FILM: Arthur Christmas: 1.20m (6.1%)
21:00 - It Was Alright in the 1970s: 1.01m (5.3%)
22:00 - FILM: Escape Plan: 0.74m (6.0%)
Channel 5 (inc +1)
13:05 - FILM: Christmas Cookies: 0.61m (6.7%)
14:50 - FILM: Love Always, Santa: 0.76m (7.1%)
16:35 - FILM: Christmas Under Wraps: 0.97m (7.1%)
17:35 - 5 News Update: 0.97m (5.9%)
17:40 - FILM: Christmas Under Wraps: 1.01m (5.8%)
18:25 - FILM: Space Cowboys: 0.49m (2.3%)
19:25 - 5 News Update: 0.41m (1.9%)
19:30 - FILM: Space Cowboys: 0.53m (2.4%)
BBC Four
21:00 - Modus: 584k (3.0%)
21:45 - Modus: 524k (3.0%)
Primetime shares
BBC One: 44.5%
ITV: 6.3% (+1: 1.3%)
BBC Two: 5.7%
Channel 4: 3.1% (+1: 0.9%)
Channel 5: 2.1% (+1: 0.2%)
BBC One vs ITV - 5-minute breakdown
Code:
17:00 - 2.38m (16.9%) | 1.45m (10.3%) 17:05 - 2.37m (16.4%) | 1.56m (10.8%) 17:10 - 2.35m (16.2%) | 1.54m (10.6%) 17:15 - 2.38m (16.0%) | 1.61m (10.8%) 17:20 - 2.48m (16.2%) | 1.66m (10.8%) 17:25 - 2.70m (17.2%) | 1.48m (9.5%) 17:30 - 3.13m (19.4%) | 1.62m (10.0%) 17:35 - 3.42m (20.6%) | 1.68m (10.1%) 17:40 - 3.75m (22.4%) | 1.67m (9.9%) 17:45 - 3.89m (22.9%) | 1.77m (10.4%) 17:50 - 3.62m (21.3%) | 1.67m (9.8%) 17:55 - 3.96m (22.8%) | 1.71m (9.9%) 18:00 - 4.42m (25.0%) | 1.75m (9.9%) 18:05 - 4.60m (25.9%) | 1.73m (9.8%) 18:10 - 4.72m (26.2%) | 1.81m (10.0%) 18:15 - 4.98m (27.6%) | 1.71m (9.5%) 18:20 - 5.45m (30.2%) | 1.82m (10.1%) 18:25 - 6.09m (33.1%) | 1.84m (10.0%) 18:35 - 6.97m (35.9%) | 1.90m (9.8%) 18:40 - 8.90m (42.3%) | 1.79m (8.5%) 18:45 - 9.98m (45.7%) | 1.55m (7.1%) 18:50 - 10.55m (47.3%) | 1.69m (7.6%) 18:55 - 10.80m (49.1%) | 1.73m (7.9%) 19:00 - 11.28m (50.9%) | 1.70m (7.7%) 19:05 - 11.27m (51.2%) | 1.66m (7.5%) 19:10 - 11.47m (51.6%) | 1.72m (7.8%) 19:15 - 11.14m (50.9%) | 1.75m (8.0%) 19:20 - 11.72m (52.6%) | 1.72m (7.7%) 19:25 - 11.70m (54.3%) | 1.31m (6.1%) 19:30 - 11.80m (54.3%) | 1.28m (5.9%) 19:35 - 11.92m (54.8%) | 1.33m (6.1%) 19:40 - 11.75m (54.4%) | 1.42m (6.6%) 19:45 - 11.73m (54.4%) | 1.37m (6.4%) 19:50 - 12.46m (55.5%) | 1.31m (5.8%) 19:55 - 12.32m (55.2%) | 1.42m (6.4%) 20:00 - 12.55m (55.7%) | 1.45m (6.4%) 20:05 - 12.63m (55.6%) | 1.46m (6.4%) 20:10 - 12.58m (56.2%) | 1.45m (6.5%) 20:15 - 11.95m (55.1%) | 1.33m (6.1%) 20:20 - 11.97m (54.3%) | 1.35m (6.3%) 20:25 - 12.64m (56.6%) | 1.49m (6.7%) 20:30 - 12.78m (57.2%) | 1.53m (6.9%) 20:35 - 12.64m (56.6%) | 1.48m (6.6%) 20:40 - 12.95m (57.1%) | 1.46m (6.4%) 20:45 - 13.10m (57.8%) | 1.39m (6.1%) 20:50 - 12.87m (56.7%) | 1.56m (6.9%) 20:55 - 8.22m (41.3%) | 1.82m (9.1%) 21:00 - 7.14m (36.9%) | 1.80m (9.3%) 21:05 - 6.93m (36.0%) | 1.70m (8.8%) 21:10 - 6.94m (36.2%) | 1.68m (8.8%) 21:15 - 6.99m (36.4%) | 1.59m (8.3%) 21:20 - 7.07m (36.8%) | 1.51m (7.9%) 21:25 - 7.12m (37.0%) | 1.54m (8.0%) 21:30 - 7.02m (36.3%) | 1.53m (7.9%) 21:35 - 7.03m (36.2%) | 1.49m (7.7%) 21:40 - 6.90m (36.1%) | 1.53m (8.0%) 21:45 - 6.91m (36.5%) | 1.41m (7.4%) 21:50 - 6.26m (33.9%) | 1.47m (8.0%) 21:55 - 5.32m (29.8%) | 1.59m (8.9%) 22:00 - 5.81m (33.1%) | 1.62m (9.2%) 22:05 - 5.78m (33.1%) | 1.63m (9.3%) 22:10 - 5.40m (31.7%) | 1.47m (8.6%) 22:15 - 4.13m (25.5%) | 1.59m (9.8%) 22:20 - 3.64m (22.9%) | 1.67m (10.5%) 22:25 - 3.67m (23.5%) | 1.92m (12.3%) 22:30 - 3.79m (24.7%) | 1.87m (12.2%) 22:35 - 3.74m (25.2%) | 1.48m (10.0%) 22:40 - 3.95m (26.8%) | 1.07m (7.3%) 22:45 - 4.11m (28.5%) | 0.99m (6.9%) 22:50 - 3.99m (28.6%) | 0.82m (5.9%) 22:55 - 3.80m (28.1%) | 0.53m (3.9%) 23:00 - 3.80m (28.9%) | 0.56m (4.2%) 23:05 - 3.66m (29.1%) | 0.57m (4.6%) 23:10 - 3.53m (30.2%) | 0.47m (4.0%) 23:15 - 3.23m (29.1%) | 0.44m (4.0%) 23:20 - 2.90m (27.5%) | 0.48m (4.6%) 23:25 - 2.81m (27.5%) | 0.50m (4.9%) 23:30 - 2.66m (26.9%) | 0.51m (5.1%) 23:35 - 2.52m (26.0%) | 0.53m (5.4%) 23:40 - 2.39m (25.8%) | 0.50m (5.4%) 23:45 - 1.30m (15.8%) | 0.51m (6.2%) 23:50 - 0.85m (10.8%) | 0.61m (7.8%) 23:55 - 0.72m (9.7%) | 0.59m (8.0%)
Originally Posted by vauxhall1964:
“Like so many of what you post that is just a joke. I recently saw on It Takes Two a clip of the first series of Strictly. It had practically non-existent staging, amateurish production values, and looked like it was coming from inside a broom cupboard . To say the show now makes minimal effort is proof that your comments in general can just be dismissed as delusional... or just rather poor trolling of this thread. Or desperate attention-seeking.”
“Like so many of what you post that is just a joke. I recently saw on It Takes Two a clip of the first series of Strictly. It had practically non-existent staging, amateurish production values, and looked like it was coming from inside a broom cupboard . To say the show now makes minimal effort is proof that your comments in general can just be dismissed as delusional... or just rather poor trolling of this thread. Or desperate attention-seeking.”
I said "comparatively" minimal effort. Of course the production is excellent, but XF tries way harder- particularly for the final. That's all.
It's a shame the gloss is being taken off Strictly's rating by posters bringing TXF into the debate yet again. Strictly deserves the limelight today for a great rating and a great final. TXF doesn't merit a mention.
Can someone explain what the 15.56M reach is?
"Minimal Effort" = Each dancer wearing a bespoke £2,500 dress
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“I said "comparatively" minimal effort. Of course the production is excellent, but XF tries way harder- particularly for the final. That's all.”
“I said "comparatively" minimal effort. Of course the production is excellent, but XF tries way harder- particularly for the final. That's all.”
"Minimal Effort" = Each dancer wearing a bespoke £2,500 dress
Absolutely amazing rating for Strictly, but perhaps more impressive than the rating itself are the shares and the peak. The first Strictly show last year averaged 50.1%, so to hold 53.5% across 2 hours is nothing short of incredible. The peaks are also hugely impressive. Even the 15-minute peak was comfortably higher than last year's 1-minute peak. Strictly's primetime share of 44.5% is the biggest primetime share I've seen for either BBC1 or ITV on a non-sport night in a while. On the same night last year it was 41.3% for BBC1 vs about 8% for ITV.
A pretty poor night for ITV but I expected nothing less. Channel 4 & 5's films did well for them, and BBC Two had a solid night.
Still an amazing figure, Dan.
Whether you like the show or not is irrelevant. This is the ratings thread and it's our job to recognise impressive ratings. In this day and age, regardless of how much it was evidently a quiet night for the other channels yesterday, that 11.8m rating IS impressive and that is that.
I should have added this to my round-up post, but I'll post it here as I think it'll get lost there.
Strictly Come Dancing - final ratings (overnights):
A pretty poor night for ITV but I expected nothing less. Channel 4 & 5's films did well for them, and BBC Two had a solid night.
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“So much for that 12m ”
“So much for that 12m
”
Still an amazing figure, Dan.
Whether you like the show or not is irrelevant. This is the ratings thread and it's our job to recognise impressive ratings. In this day and age, regardless of how much it was evidently a quiet night for the other channels yesterday, that 11.8m rating IS impressive and that is that.
I should have added this to my round-up post, but I'll post it here as I think it'll get lost there.
Strictly Come Dancing - final ratings (overnights):
Code:
2004: 7.8m (43.0%) [peak: 9.7m (51.0%)]| 8.9m (43.0%) [peak: 9.7m (46.0%)] 2004: 9.0m (39.0%) [peak: 10.0m (42.0%)]| 10.6m (44.0%) [peak: 11.5m (48.0%)] 2005: 10.4m (41.5%) | 10.0m (37.9%) [peak: 11.4m (45.0%)] 2006: 10.5m (47.9%) [peak: 11.5m (50.7%)]| 11.7m (46.8%) [peak: 12.3m (49.3%)] 2007: 10.90m (49.3%) [peak: 12.59m (53.8%)]| 11.40m (46.8%) [peak: 12.36m (50.1%)] 2008: 11.58m (47.4%) [peak: 12.5m (49.5%)]| 12.21m (49.7%) [peak: 13.26m (53.9%)] 2009: 10.05m (41.5%) | 10.42m (42.3%) [peak: 11.41m (46.2%)] 2010: 12.97m (45.8%) [peak: 14.47m (50.7%)]| 13.08m (47.6%) [peak: 14.10m (51.7%)] 2011: 12.18m (48.2%) [peak: 13.25m (51.4%)]| 11.93m (45.8%) 2012: 12.35m (49.1%) [peak: 13.97m (53.1%)]| 12.11m (46.4%) [peak: 13.43m (50.8%)] 2013: 11.48m (48.1%) [peak: 12.32m (49.1%)]| 11.48m (45.8%) [peak: 12.57m (48.7%)] 2014: 10.65m (46.4%) [peak: 11.46m (48.7%)]| 10.21m (42.8%) [peak: 11.20m (47.8%)] 2015: 10.98m (50.1%) [peak: 11.9m ]| 11.01m (48.4%) [peak: 12.2m (52.7%)] 2016: 11.83m (53.5%) [peak: 13.62m (58.8%)]
The shares tell the biggest story - 44.5% vs 6.3%. Wow. Must be the biggest gap in a long time between BBC One and ITV.
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“I said "comparatively" minimal effort. Of course the production is excellent, but XF tries way harder- particularly for the final. That's all.”
“I said "comparatively" minimal effort. Of course the production is excellent, but XF tries way harder- particularly for the final. That's all.”
No it doesn't. Both shows work equally hard to put on an amazing final. These sorts of comments are why people can't take you or your defence of XF seriously.
713 of 877
