- There's just something about that last Friday before Halloween on NBC. For the third straight year, the network got a nice number out of Grimm on this night, and the premiere of Dracula was a bit of a pleasant surprise in fully retaining that Grimm number... at least for now. Keep in mind that Grimm has only done better than 1.8 a couple times in its Friday history (both of which happened to be this week on the calendar in previous years).
- The CW was also in premiere mode with the return of The Carrie Diaries, which brought a 0.3 A18-49 and 780,000 viewers to its Friday debut. Pretty bad, though I don't know how anyone who followed its usual 0.4 Monday ratings from last spring could've reasonably expected any better from a Friday move.
- The other Friday originals were pretty steady against the new competition, and 20/20 was up a good bit, perhaps benefiting from no longer having to air against Dateline. (Dateline is now at 8/7c leading into NBC's drama block.)
FULL TABLE:
| Info | Show | Timeslot | True | |||||||
| A18-49 | Skew | Last | LeLa | Rank | y2y | TLa | Ty2y | |||
| Last Man Standing (R) | 1.0 | 25% | -23% | -41% | 1.1 | |||||
| The Neighbors (R) | 0.7 | 26% | -30% | -63% | 0.9 | |||||
| Shark Tank | 2.0 | 34% | +0% | +0.0 | -0.3 | 1/6 | +11% | +0% | +48% | 2.5 |
| 20/20 | 1.5 | 29% | +25% | +0.3 | +0.0 | 2/6 | +15% | +30% | +3% | 1.6 |
| ABC: | +1% | -5% | ||||||||
| Undercover Boss | 1.6 | 24% | -11% | -0.2 | n/a | 2/5 | n/a | -11% | +78% | 1.9 |
| Hawaii Five-0 | 1.4 | 19% | +0% | +0.0 | -0.2 | 4/5 | n/a | +0% | -7% | 1.7 |
| Blue Bloods | 1.3 | 15% | +0% | +0.0 | +0.0 | 4/5 | -13% | +0% | -13% | 1.4 |
| CBS: | -4% | +10% | ||||||||
| Dateline Fri | 1.3 | 27% | +0% | +0.0 | n/a | 1/5 | -7% | +73% | -16% | 1.5 |
| Grimm | 1.8 | 37% | n/a | n/a | n/a | 1/1 | -10% | +57% | -8% | 2.2 |
| Dracula | 1.8 | 43% | n/a | n/a | n/a | 1/1 | n/a | +20% | +24% | 1.9 |
| NBC: | +44% | -1% | ||||||||
| MasterChef Junior | 1.4 | 46% | +8% | +0.1 | n/a | 2/5 | n/a | +12% | +56% | 1.6 |
| The Simpsons (R) | 0.8 | 54% | +0% | -11% | 1.0 | |||||
| The Simpsons (R) | 0.7 | 52% | +0% | -22% | 0.9 | |||||
| Fox: | +8% | +19% | ||||||||
| The Carrie Diaries | 0.3 | 49% | n/a | n/a | n/a | 1/1 | -50% | +0% | -25% | 0.4 |
| iHeartRadio Katy Perry | 0.2 | 38% | n/a | -50% | +0% | 0.2 | ||||
| CW: | -29% | -17% | ||||||||
| Big5: | +7% | +3% | ||||||||
KEY (click to expand)
A18-49 - Adults 18-49 rating. Percentage of US TV-owning adults 18-49 watching the program.
Skew - Percentage of adults 18-49 within the show's total viewership.
Last - A18-49 difference (percent and numerical) from the show's previous episode.
LeLa - A18-49 difference between the show's lead-in and its lead-in for the previous episode.
Rank - The A18-49 rating's rank among the show's episodes so far this season.
y2y - Percent difference between A18-49 and the show's rating a year ago.
TLa - Percent difference between A18-49 and the network's rating in the timeslot one week ago.
Ty2y - Percent difference between A18-49 and the network's rating in the timeslot one year ago.
True - A metric that adjusts the A18-49 rating for overall viewing levels, competition and lead-in. PRELIMINARY CALCULATION. For finals, see SpotVault.
(R) - Repeat.
Much more detail on these numbers at the New Daily Spotted Ratings page.
Skew - Percentage of adults 18-49 within the show's total viewership.
Last - A18-49 difference (percent and numerical) from the show's previous episode.
LeLa - A18-49 difference between the show's lead-in and its lead-in for the previous episode.
Rank - The A18-49 rating's rank among the show's episodes so far this season.
y2y - Percent difference between A18-49 and the show's rating a year ago.
TLa - Percent difference between A18-49 and the network's rating in the timeslot one week ago.
Ty2y - Percent difference between A18-49 and the network's rating in the timeslot one year ago.
True - A metric that adjusts the A18-49 rating for overall viewing levels, competition and lead-in. PRELIMINARY CALCULATION. For finals, see SpotVault.
(R) - Repeat.
Much more detail on these numbers at the New Daily Spotted Ratings page.
More Spotted Ratings in the Index.
18 comments:
I don't understand how The Carrie Diaries is still on... Its ratings last year weren't spectacular either.
The CW has ten hours to fill. Gotta put something there.
Damn. I was going to ask the unofficial Question of what the room thought The Carrie Diaries would premiere at, and I was thinking of a 0.3/Field option.
If the prelim numbers hold, I'm surprised that Dracula retained 100% of Grimm's demo. It's definitely a better start than I expected.
I know but couldn't they just put a re-run there or something?, CW re-runs of their popular shows get higher ratings than new episodes of TCD.
It's actually better than it looks because the half hours were 1.8/1.7/1.9/1.7, which means it actually grew from Grimm, even though it did lost a bit of that audience at the half hour
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that Supernatural repeats would do decently on Fridays, and it's not like they haven't put scheduled repeats on the fall schedule before. There must be some incentives for the CW (from CBS or Warner Bros) to fill their hours with original programming, otherwise they wouldn't have bothered renewing TCD (or BATB, for that matter). I dunno, the CW is a really hard network for me to figure out.
I don't have concrete evidence of this, but based on some ad numbers, I have the following hypothesis about repeats' value:
- if a show gets, let's say a 1.0, in an original airing, that means that roughly 1.3 million adults 18-49 are watching the show, thus meaning that advertisers pay for those 1.3 million adults.
- if a repeat of the same show gets the same 1.0 in a repeat airing, it is likely that only, let's say 50% of those are new viewers (I have no idea about this percentage, I've used a random number). Therefore, only 0.65 adults 18-49 would be new to advertisers. I don't think this means that the remaining 0.65 would be worthless to advertisers. But I doubt it is equally attractive to them to sell adds to repeated viewers and new viewers. If the old viewers had already watched the adds, it is likely that having them watching it again is less valuable than having it watched by new people (which is achieved if you put a new, albeit low rated show, on the slot). It is all about scarcity.
Now, like I said, I don't have proof of this, but I kind of believe that a 0.3 rating in original programming is worth more than a 0.3 rating in repeat programming. To what extent this goes I am not sure. But this is why I believe we got TCD renewed
I agree that advertisers seem to value repeats less than original content, but I'm not too sure on your reasoning. I don't live in the US, but don't you see the exact same ads for several weeks in a row on different episodes of a show? For example: For ads running on, say, Masterchef Junior, an ad being shown on episode two will be seen by mostly the same people who saw it during episode one (way greater than 50%), but you wouldn't get that second ad for way cheaper. My (completely unfounded) theory would be that viewers watching an original episode would be more engaged than viewers watching a repeat, and thus more likely to pay attention during the ads. Fans of TCD who watch original episodes will pay more attention than people who just stumble upon a Supernatural repeat.
But there must be more to the TCD renewal than just ad rates - producing an entire second season of TCD costs millions of dollars, while chucking on a repeat is pretty much free. There's gotta be more to it, I don't think the ad rate difference between a repeat and an original is that severe.
It's clearly not down to ratings, so I imagine it's probably down to internal politics at The CW. My guess is that CW execs like the show, they want to reward quality and signal that they will support shows to encourage people to work with the network.
That being said, I thought The Carrie Diaries was fundamentally misconceived. It appeals to nobody. A CW teen soap alienates older audiences who liked Sex and the City, the 80s period setting alienates young people who like teen soaps, and the Sex and the City connection alienates a lot of people, especially men, who might otherwise be interested in an 80s teen soap.
The "new direction" CW stuff doesn't seem to get the dollars per demo point that Dawn's beloved rich kid soaps did, if the AdAge survey is any guide.
Does TCD?
You have good points there. So much for my theory. Then I am not sure what it is. I think I remember reading at some point that advertisers perceive negatively a network that shows up at the upfront with scheduled hours of repeats from the get go. Maybe that's the purpose of TCD? In any case it doesn't make sense because they could have easily just put Nikita there.
Since the show was moved from the timeslot in which it was next season and to a Friday nonetheless, it is virtually impossible to make any analysis to its ad rates that don't involve a lot of speculation from advertisers' part I am afraid.
God, who knows. It could even be an affiliate thing, as I'm sure the affiliates aren't big fans of the CW wasting an hour on CW repeats when they could put their own, higher rated, repeats on instead (shows like Seinfeld and Friends still pull great repeat numbers). It's probably a little bit of everything.
I agree yes
Some quick maths suggests that TCD pulls ~$64k per ratings point, compared to $47k for TVD and Arrow, $67k for HOD, $36k for Supernatural, $65k for ANTM and $66k for BATB. This makes it seem like there's a premium for soaps over genre shows (except for BATB, which might be underperforming), but shows like TCD and HOD might just skew way younger than some of the genre stuff.
I don't think you can do that analysis for shows that were moved or changed their situations drastically (competition, lead-ins), because there is a lot of speculation involved.
Yeah, when we're dealing with such massive rounding with CW ratings (a 0.3 could be a 2.5 or a 3.49, a gigantic range) it's hard to get a real gauge on their exact value. Even if there is a premium on teen soaps, it's hard to blame the CW for going in the genre direction, especially as it's been years since they've had a successful show that wasn't a genre show (I'm talking pre-Vampire Diaries).
I agree with you. The rounding thing with the CW bothers me yeah. But to be honest, even though in practice I tend not to do this as much as I would like to, I think we should all call 0.1/0.2 fluctuations as the show being flat. No way we can know it if really fell in reality. Between Nielsen's statistical margin of error and between rounding, there is just no way to accurately know such minor changes. With the cw this is even more pronounced, of course.
Post a Comment