Does HD count this time? as it wasn't on at the same time...on HD it came on around 8ish...

Never the less...7.82 is excellent! Considering that it now shames the hell out of those who thought the show had sunk for getting 6.2 in overnights! That is 1.6 million in timeshift!! fantastic!

We can't add in the HD because it was on at a different time, but it will be included in the total reach.

7.82 million is a great result - another time shift of over 1.5 million.

Will update ratings chart later - on iPod touch in starbucks ATM!

I'm not sure I understand - why can't we include HD that was on at a different time, but it's OK to count Sky+ and other timeshifting done by the viewer?

Because the HD showing was a repeat, Newbie, so it falls under the same sort of category as the BBC3 repeats. The time shift viewers are all people that watched the original broadcast at a later date. It should be noted that officially BBC still don't combine their final HD figures at all, preferring BARB to represent them separately.

********* S1* *S2* *S3* *S4* *S5*
episode 1 10.81: 8.62: 8.71 : 9.14:10.08
episode 2 7.97: 9.24: 7.23 : 9.04 : 8.42
episode 3 8.86: 8.31: 8.41 : 7.5: 7.82
episode 4 7.63: 7.90 : 6.69 : 7.06
episode 5 7.98: 9.22: 6.96 : 6.53
episode 6 8.63: 7.64:7.19 : 7.33
episode 7 8.01: 6.76: 7.41 : 8.41
episode 8 8.06: 6.32: 7.74: 6.27
episode 9 7.11: 6.08: 7.21 : 7.84
episode 10 6.86: 6.66: 6.62: 8.05
episode 11 7.68: 7.14: 7.84: 8.09
episode 12 6.81: 8.19: 7.31: 8.78
episode 13 6.91: 8.22: 8.62:10.57
Average--- 7.95: 7.71: 7.55: 8.05

Series 5 has the:

second highest ratings for a series opener.
third highest ratings for the second episode of a series.
fourth highest ratings for the third episode of a series

Notes:

1.series 5 figures include simultaneous HD viewing figures
2. series 5 episode 3 did not have a simultaneous HD showing. It did however get 0.38m viewers later in the evening. Total audience for that day was 8.2 million

I wouldn't classify it as a repeat, since it's in a different format.

In a normal week there are half a million people who could watch it on BBC One, but prefer to watch it on BBC HD. This week, with it not being simulcast, most of them still refused to watch it in SD.

Regardless of that we are pushing things already by adding in simultaneous hd figures as it is. We cannot make assumptions about how many of those people would have watched a live showing at the time the original episode aired therefore it does not and cannot be counted in the data as a simultaneous showing can. How do you know they refused to watch it in SD? Many of them may have watched it in SD and then later again in HD, which is yet another reason the figure for HD in this case cannot be added in to the figures.

It was clearly established when the overnight ratings came out minus the HD figures over a week ago that they would not be counted together. That hasn't suddenly changed with the final ratings.

eta: the clearest way of defining this actually is that if the BBC wanted to, BARB would merged the simultaneous HD and SD figures. They would not, however, merge non-simultaneous figures. Therefore the later HD showing does not count.

Friday's BBC Three repeat of The Time of Angels was watched by 0.32 million viewers according to overnight figures. Doctor Who Confidential got 0.22 million watching.

While waiting for the viewing figures this morning, here are the total reaches of the first 3 episodes of the series:

The Eleventh Hour - 12.99m
The Beast Below - 11.08m
Victory of the Daleks - 10.16m

Total reach includes final ratings (inc HD), first week repeats and i player views.

Right so, moving on, here are the overnight ratings for the 5th episode of the four series to date:

World War III - 7.28million
Rise of the Cybermen 8.52 million
Evolution of the Daleks - 6.50 million
The Poison sky - 5.90 million

Series 2 got a boost due to the return of the cybermen

Out of interest (apologies if this is said somewhere else) are the Confidentials getting the same ratings as before or more?

In terms of final ratings

series 4:

4.1 - 0.96
4.2 -0.63
4.3 - 0.71

series 5

5.1 - 0.93
5.2 - 0.56
5.3 - 0.59

So a little down overall, but then again, the number of views on iplayer etc is much greater. I suspect overall it would be about the same, but since I haven't seen figures for the total reach of series 4 confidential it wouldn't be fair to compare.

When do we get the overnights for last night?

They are delayed this week unfortunately. Normally it's before 10am.

Over night ratings finally in: 6.9 million (34.5% share)

Nice figures, comfortably ahead of episodes at this stage the last couple of series

Good going. The new series seems to be grabbing the audience's attention again.

Good figure - although the rating share is lower than before, I'm sure. Didn't season 4 usually hit 39%?

Does that include HD or just BBC 1?

And as this series seems to be getting a bigger timeshift than those gone by figure that's got a chance of beating out WW3 in final figures too? ROTC seems too far away but as mentioned earlier that got a bump from, uh, the cybermen so fair enough really.

Is it just me that occasionally looks at these figures and wonders how a show famous for tinfoil monsters and ever-so-slightly camp action has ended up as a sci-fi Juggernaut sweeping all before it on a Saturday night when every single bit of research said such shows were deader than A-line flares with pockets in the knees?

the equivalent episode in series 4 had a share of 34% exactly.

Yes includes HD of 300k


Timeshifts now seem to be around the 1.5 million mark compared to around 500k for series 1.


No, it's great to see, but hard to believe sometimes!

Nuts... oh well, still a great figure!


Oh isn't it just! And talking of great to see, thank you so much for taking the time to post this stuff, very very much appreciated

Why 'again'?

well the big news this series has generally been when the final ratings come through.

Tomorrow we should get final ratings for Time of Angels. Time shifts to date have been 1.5 million +....

and no worries, I have a deep and abiding love of statistical data!

Well, because it did before and it is now. Hence 'again'.

I think he meant "once again"

Apologies, I read that again as if it had lost viewers but they were now watching again....