This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"My mom gave me yucky chips again. Do you want them?"
11976 members | you are not logged in | 23 September 2019




Tweet













September 28 2014

ABC spins the Live+3 ratings for the Agents of SHIELD S2 premiere. According to the press release, the show "went up to 8.9 million viewers (+48% - up +2.9 mil from 6.0 mil L+SD) and a 3.2 in Adults 18-49 (+52% - up +1.1 from 2.1 L+SD)."

What des this mean for renewal chances? what does this mean for how ABC execs feel about the prospects of this show?
Well put it this way, more of the target demographic watched SHIELD 2x01 than watched the new NCIS spin off (which opened big for CBS).
At this point, I think some people are tuning back in to see whether it's gotten any better. If it can keep up the momentum and give us some decent episodes, it just might keep its audience or gain.

CBS has been trying to snare a younger demographic for years. NCIS: New Orleans is NOT going to do that. CBS will probably always win with total viewers but not the coveted demo.
It's really way too early to talk about renewal chances. The TV season just started and it's only been one episode plus ABC has to see how the rest of their lineup does. These numbers look good and the fact it has the MCU people behind it, that it seems to draw in males (ABC typically skews toward women so they'd likely want some more men to balance it out), and the fact that most places seem to like the premiere is all good. Being against heavy-hitters like NCIS and The Voice as well as another genre show in Supernatural are all challenges. It's last few episodes before Agent Carter's run will be interesting.

I'd only be very worried if it dips below 1.0 during the Tuesday ratings.
But DVR numbers mean nothing to advertisers as they assume that no one os watching the commercials with a DVRed episode. Because advertisers are the ones paying for shows through ad revenue what do these +3 or +7 ratings mean? Can't the networks separate how many people watch on Hulu, as it is owned by the networks and forces you to watch anywhere from 1 minute to 2 and a half minutes of ads per break?
Tausif, as I understand it make goods are calculated based on C3/Live + 3. So that's the benchmark. As for Hulu and ABC.Com they
are meaningless since they run different commercials which are sold I believe at cheaper rates. In any case the broadcast advertisers
aren't interested in them at this time.

[ edited by JDL on 2014-09-29 09:43 ]
I don't use Hulu so I don't know about that. Network ratings have been and are in a steady decline for a while now. Apparently Firefly's ratings would be decent compared to things now? It does not need to set Big Bang Theory or Walking Dead numbers. As long as it holds steady it's chances are good, more so whenever they pull the plug on newer shows that don't do well, as all networks usually do after a little while.

I wouldn't say DVR numbers are meaningless because they still mean enough to track. JDL also shed light on this.

SHIELD is on some level one big ad for the MCU. Creatively that has drawbacks but it has a unique set of people backing it from the movies, possibly (?) the first collaboration of this type in TV history. And it's still early in the season. Unless it nosedives to below 1.0 levels I think it will be fine. It has a powerful brand behind it.

If you want to know what happens to quality shows that don't have that kind of support, I'd look into what's going on with Legend of Korra, which is thankfully getting to end how the creators intended it too.
A big part of all this is the buzz factor. You take 2 shows with the same current ratings where one started out gangbusters and then
went down like AoS did versus one that starts out weakish and builds up to decent and they will have different buzz factors due to
the differing expectations they have associated with them.
These numbers are excellent. AoS will get picked up for a 3rd season. I'm also going to enjoy S2. Networks get paid on C3. It is the only number that matters (Some networks have cut C7 deals as well). C3 is not ever made public. You will never know what these numbers are. L/SD, L+3 and L+7 which are made public are indications but not definitive about a show's success or failure. There are also about a dozen different ways a network/studio makes money off a show. None of that info is usually made public either.

My point is, it is so silly to get caught up in a .1 or .2 here or there. Those numbers are meaningless in the larger scheme of the economics of a show. Meaningless.
Noteworthy thing about ratings this season is that they matter to more than just this show's future. SHIELD's success or lack thereof will likely have a strong influence on the ratings of the Agent Carter spinoff. It will be interesting to see how these shows help or hinder each other...
It's like they say on Zap2It: it doesn't matter if you're one of the lowest rated shows in your timeslot; just don't be one the lowest rated scripted shows on your network. As long as they stay at least in the middle of ABC's pack they'll be just fine. Particularly if they continue to do well with the 18-49 demo and with time-shifted viewers (which Nielsen and the networks finally started taking into consideration last season), and the show continues its improvement on the creative end of things (which could bring positive word-of-mouth advertising like the second half of Buffy: Season 2 did). It's way too early to hit the panic button (or whip out the confetti and "Mission Accomplished" banner, for that matter).

[ edited by JesusSavedIn01 on 2014-09-29 21:42 ]
IrrationaliTV what is tne difference between C3 and Live+3 ? Nothing pops up on a cursory google search.

[ edited by JDL on 2014-09-29 22:56 ]
Live +3 is the numbers reported by Nielsen to the public estimating everyone who watched a show within 3 days of the initial airing. C3 is the data reported by Nielsen only to networks and advertisers that indicated who watched the commercials in a show within 3 days of airing. It's the real number that the network gets paid for. And to disspell the myth I saw repeated further above, a shockingly high percentage of people who watch a show via DVR also watch all the commercials. :)
Thanks IrrationaliTV. That cleared it up. The last I remember hearing anything about the ability to determine if the commercials were being skipped was several years ago and it was iirc being tested.

That's interesting about the people watching all the commercials. I seem to remember a huge fight in Congress years ago where the networks essentially wanted to kill off the FF button when replaying
their shows. Evidently it was a waste of time. And I suspect knowing what commercials get FF'd through is actually very valuable information for the ad agencies and the advertisers.
Networks would still prefer fast forward disabled and on most VOD platforms that is the case. Just because the number is higher than you think doesn't mean it is 100%. :)
Just because the number is higher than you think doesn't mean it is 100%. :)

Well tbh if its 60% or better I would think that pretty doggone good. Before reading that shockingly high statement I would have guessed about 35%. Thanks again for making this clearer.
My wife doesn't the commercials on DVR'd content (unless I'm in the room to take control of the remote). She just forgets she can, or can't be bothered. There must be more like that out there.

This thread has been closed for new comments.


You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home