Is this a joke?

Home and away gets 2 million on five so I'm sure neighbours will get at least three or four million. Your obviously talking rubish so please refrain from doing so

It depends if you only count the main show ratings, or include the repeats as well. If you just count the main show ratings, then Corrie does indeed usually come top of the ratings. But tv is fast evolving to suit the viewers' needs, and many people nowadays watch repeats as it suits them, either via bbc3/itv2 repeats, on demand, omnibuses, etc. If these ratings are factored in, then usually Eastenders are top of the ratings. The EE omnibus alone gets at least one million viewers more than the Corrie omnibus.

No joke just the truth. If youv'e been watching it recently you would know what I'm talking about, Neighbours is the best and I have grown up with it my whole life and will always love it! I know I'm right why can't others see? Anyway whilst the show has rated over 1 million in Australia I see it will have no toruble doing so here as it has a far larger fan base. You guys need to find the perfect blend!

No offence to anyone but can we please just concentrate on overnights to save all arguments

Unfortuntately for you, neighbours is not rating over one million viewers in Australia. In fact, it regularly attracts less than 700,000 viewers. Source: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/a4...r-concern.html. I have nothing against neighbours at all, and your opinion is that it is the best... it is an opinion... it is not a fact, which you are suggesting. I heard that neighbours was not doing well in Oz, so they've revamped the show.

That article is 5 months old. The ratings have topped 1 million at least a couple of times in the last few weeks, the ratings have been rising as the stories have been improving.

Fair enough. But two out of ten times isnt that great. Anyways, I do know though that on five here, it will very likely top 1million. It's more popular in the Uk than Australia.

I said at least as they were the only ones I knew about.

I really cannot see Neighbours doing that great when it moves to Five, I do like the optomistic views that it will get 4 million (I think I saw above)

I am a big fan of Neighbours and agree that since the new look it is great, but I cannot see it getting more than 1 million on Five

IMO, If it changes time slot this will be a bad thing for it

Friday 3rd August 2007
Coronation Street (ITV1) 19:30: 8.2m..(48%)..
EastEnders (BBC1) 20:00: 7.9m..(44%)..
Emmerdale (ITV1) 19:00: 6.3m..(41%)..

Corrie top as expected, with Eastenders only 300,000 behind.

Just to join in on the Neighbours debate, I can't see it hitting 4 million viewers sorry, IMO I can't see it topping 1.8-2.0m on FIVE and maybe 500,00-700,000 on FIVE LIFE.

It's obviously not going get 4 million because it doesn't even get that on BBC One. But I can see it possibly getting 2 million.

It regularly gets 2.3m (1:40pm) and 2.5m (5:35pm) and has averaged 4.7m for the first six months of the year (two showings). It will be a different story on Five though.

I was referring to the teatime showing, rather than adding both showings. Wasn't everybody else?

Corrie on 48% - and yet people say their ratings are falling

So....
17m people watching TV at 7:30, which would have given EE 7.5m viewers.
Or, 18m people watching TV @ 8:00, which would have given Corrie 8.6m.
Both leaving EE 700,000 behind.

Thats not right.

You want to go back to School and learn your maths.

In what sense is it wrong?

But their ratings have fallen.

It always gets a decent share at 7:30 because there's less people watching TV at 7:30 than 8:00. Even the second Corrie on a Mondy drops in share because there's more people watching TV at 8:30 than 7:30. Proof that it's down to the timeslot more than anything.

Their ratings have fallen in number of viewers, earlier on in the year it was getting over 10 million viewers and sometimes 11 million viewers. Earlier on in the year EastEnders was getting 8-9 million viewers and still was until recently when the warm weather finally started to kick in and even now it hasn't dropped that much consistently. Corrie's ratings dropped off when EastEnders ratings were consistent and on some nights increasing. There was a decline, if we ignore the 11 millions which we'll give one storyline, Tracy's trial, the sole credit for, there was still a drop from 10 million viewers for normal episodes whereas Corrie's main rival was not experiencing such a drop at the same time.

Emmerdale has taken the biggest dive however but that was always on the cards when you take into account how much ITV milk it and the fact its not had a decent storyline this side of christmas. Also Corrie could afford to spare a few viewers and is still doing okay whereas Emmerdale couldn't really and has worrying ratings now on most nights whereas at least the other twos shares haven't been hit so badly if nothing else. The shares are supposed to be decreasing at a much slower pace than the number of viewers so Emmerdale should still be consistently at 40% even when it only pulls in 5 or 6 million viewers, drops to 35% are shocking and out of the norm IMO, you can't put them down to the year on year gradual decrease in audiences, I'd say it's storyline problems that're to blame more than anything personally.

Really - where is it wrong?
Please explain.

Haven't heard that one before!
And yes in viewing numbers their overnights have fallen, but the share remains constant, and in some cases even risen.
It's been in the 40-50% range for the last few months, (barring the odd blip), despite the changeable weather.
I don't think they have anything to worry about

Well it's just based on 'scenarios' isn't it and not what actually happened and for all we know your maths may not be 100% correct.

You had a go at rizstar for talking about the scenario where if you add up repeats etc, EastEnders comes out on top so surely using 'scenarios' that are not logged by BARB yourself is hypocritical? Although I'm willing to bet nobody would have been bothered about rizstar's 'official ratings roundup' the other day if it had shown Corrie coming out on top.

Well EastEnders viewing numbers did not really suffer any kind of a dip until very recently and even that isn't consistent and it was getting good shares (it still is) at the same time.

But I never said Corrie was doing badly, I just pointed out that its ratings had fallen this year, more than EastEnders had. And yes I was talking more in viewer numbers, what you say about the share is indeed correct, it's the other ITV soap that needs to worry about its ratings, Corrie is still doing okay.

It was only done in a bit of 'fun' - we all know it was based on a 'scenario' and not 'what actually happened'.
It just goes to show what can be done with a bunch of statistics, and some manipulation.
Also, you could have checked the fgures rather than just calling them 'wrong'


No my 'go at' rizstar during the week was because he was trying to pass off his calculations as 'official'.
At least I'm not doing that.....
And I'm willing to bet that the only reason you and others didn't jump in the thread were because EE came out on top.

So??
It's shares have risen therefore it is doing better.

I think you are getting confused.
Just because EE is doing better - doesn't automagically mean that Corrie is doing worse.