Angel rating according to Zap2it.
Angel did 2.8/4, which I think is down from the last couple of weeks. And The Futon Critic gave Angel a 4.2/6 in metered markets, and a 2.9/4 in fast nation ratings.
Don't ask me what they mean, I have no clue.
November 21 2003
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.


And what was the highest rated season? Was it season 2?
Simon | November 21, 03:13 CET
bunnyofthekungfu | November 21, 03:29 CET
400lb_Gorilla | November 21, 03:36 CET
For example:
<A HREF="http://www.whedonesque.com">Whedonesque</A> will come out as Whedonesque.
This site HTML Goodies has some useful primers for basic HTML code.
Simon | November 21, 04:28 CET
400lb_Gorilla | November 21, 05:00 CET
[ edited by Simpleba on 2003-11-21 04:53 ]
Simpleba | November 21, 06:14 CET
Angel loses about 30% of the Smallville audience which isn't terrible but it would be much better around the 20 - 15% loss ratio. The show's overall rank is up a good 5 - 10 places now and the overall show average last season was a 3.65, this season is about a 4.8 - a nice increase for a 5th season niche show thus the full season order from the WB.
TaraDi | November 21, 07:38 CET
Simpleba | November 21, 10:00 CET
I went in thinking this would be the end for Angel with it barely being renewed from last season and all. It's strongest hope may be the WBs inability to create succesful new shows (see Tarzan or Fearless). If the WB had been more successful with it's pilots last year, I doubt we would have even seen season 5. The downside for Angel is that the WB put effort in to trying to "fix" the show with bringing over Buffy characters and asking for a more streamlined episodes. If those changes can't bring extra juice, they may decide that the show is just to culty to save.
I have to say though that I am mighty impressed with Angel's ability to hold up againist The OC, which is the hot new show of the year and appeals to the exact market the WB typically courts. Angel has lost very few viewers to The OC since it's move.
Another thing about last night was the finale of The Bachelor which looked like it dominated the timeslot and probably drove Angel's numbers down a bit.
Unitas | November 21, 11:46 CET
And when you look at 'Zapit' (the 2.8/4 site), they show Smallville and Jake 2.0 to be pretty much at the same spots from Angel proportionally. So I take it this site simply has their own findings and/or calculations? Really, the ratings are confusing and dubious enough as it is.
So overall we can say Angel is going pretty steady, better than last season averagely, but still not retaining as much from Smallville's audience as hoped. Would that be a correct assessment?
Then I would like hear you guys' thoughts on this: what if Angel was NOT right after Smallville. What if Smallville was on monday or something, and Angel had the exact same ratings, would that seem more favorable then?
It all seems very relative.
EdDantes | November 21, 12:34 CET
And yes, if the Bachelor had it's finale at the same time, (I didn't know) I'd say that's pretty good.
EdDantes | November 21, 12:39 CET
Yes, that is a correct statement. I hadn't heard/read anywhere either that the WB was "displeased" with the carryover - just that they would like it higher. If they were displeased, you can almost be assured that they would have moved Angel already or not given it the season pickup.
Otherwise, IF Smallville was not the lead-in and the numbers were attributed JUST to Angel's concept & cast changes alone, the increase in numbers would be a HUGE surge and a major plus for a 5th year, niche genre show.
[ edited by TaraDi on 2003-11-21 19:41 ]
[ edited by TaraDi on 2003-11-21 19:42 ]
TaraDi | November 21, 18:28 CET
One more thing, I looked up Tarzan and it lost 5% of Charmed's Sunday audience in it's first airing but was losing as much as 50% by week #6 which is the reason that show got cancelled. Tarzan is a real embarassment considering the considerable amount of advertsing the WB did. I live in LA and you haven't been able to go to a theatre in three months without seeing a Tarzan ad before the movie... along with a Smallville ad and then a general WB ad featuring all the stars on the WB without a single shot of anyone from Angel. I mean they have the entire cast of Grounded For Life, for pete's sake.
Unitas | November 21, 19:09 CET
You read about this in the Hollywood Reporter and Fox News has a similar story as well.
And thanks to the very nice person who emailed me this link which has ratings for all of the seasons of Buffy, Angel and Firefly. Much appreciated.
Simon | November 21, 19:29 CET
Unitas | November 21, 19:35 CET
Does anyone know what the average male in this demographic spends on products as a result of TV advertising?
Simon | November 21, 19:41 CET
These ratings come from Nielsen Media Research and are displayed in the form: rating/share. The rating is the percentage of households watching the program. The share is the percentage of TV sets in use that are watching the program.
The overnights (aka metered markets) are sampled from the top urban areas of the US. The national rankings cover 100% of the country. As a rule, sci-fi/fantasy shows tend to do better in urban markets. In the national rankings, one ratings point equates to a little over a million people (the total number of TVs in the US is in the neighborhood of 106 million).
Breakdowns by demographics are done at the national level.
Clear as mud?
Scott | November 21, 19:54 CET
It made me want to cry thinking what COULD have been had they started off with Serenity as god intended.
I mean had it been anyone but Joss I wouldn't have watched the show after The Train Job either. And then I would never have seen War Stories. Or, god forbid, Objects in Space, which may well rank with Hush, Conversations with Dead People and the Twin Peaks pilot for television goodness. OK, I'm just spouting off and picking other top shows out of the air - I'd have to think about that last statement a bit to see if I really believe it. But it pains me when I think what I might have lost had I not had faith in Joss and kept watching that show. And what we have all lost by Fox's lack of faith.
/rant
melsta | November 21, 20:07 CET
And what we have all lost by Fox's lack of faith.
Well, I think she changed her name to Tru, but Faith's alive and kicking at Fox. :)
splay | November 21, 20:42 CET
[ edited by melsta on 2003-11-21 20:09 ]
melsta | November 21, 21:51 CET
It's pointed out that there's been bad blood between the networks and the company for some time anyway, because the networks and other clients consider the Nielson data (1) overly expensive and (2) innaccurately and poorly acquired from their test base.
Can't comment on (1), but having heard how a Nielson household is tracked, I have to agree. I have a TiVo, and my viewing habits are automatically and exactly tracked (including what commercials I zip over, what parts of the show I fast-forward or repeat, etc.), with no muss, no fuss (and anonymously).
If the Nielson's used a similar piece of hardware (perhaps with something that allows each family member to "login" when they're watching or not), they could save themselves significant money in processing all the written data they currently get, plus provide extremely precise info.
I'm amazed TiVo hasn't made a grab for Nielson's business.
bookrats | November 21, 23:15 CET
Firefly Flanatic | November 21, 23:26 CET
Of course inside I'm screaming at a world so crazy that it favors sooo many other crrrappy shows over this one. So much junk that does higher in the ratings......sad.
As for the TiVo's I think they don't matter because you can leave the commercials out of them right? So advertisers (who are all that matter to the networks) won't care if the whole country watches Angel via the TiVo.
EdDantes | November 22, 00:26 CET