Well, now you are comparing the second episode of AI, which goes to the
quality of the show, which as I said is not very good. Their rating went
from 2.3 to 1.8 (about 22% loss). The Voice on the other hand is at 2.3,
down only one tenth from its premier.

Even do, AI was the second highest rated network show Monday night, and
that’s not nothing. If it continues to drop it may become a liability, but
I imagine if it stays a reasonable second place most nights it will have
justified itself.

Again, my point is more than ever tv ratings have to be understood in
context, not as absolutes. Probably the best matrix would be something like
what share of tvs tuned to network shows were tuned to the target show.

I have not been able to complete my data set of ratings for similar
programs over last 10 years, but so far most programs are down severely,
especially in last 2 years. It just doesn’t mean anything anymore to say a
program’s ratings are down compared to last year, without saying if the
decline is more or less than other programs.

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:17 PM Steve Timko <steveti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> All that money brought them 3.4 million fewer viewers than The Voice.
>
>
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/tv-ratings-monday-march-12-2018
> /
>
> Not sent from an iPhone
> On Mar 13, 2018, at 7:12 AM, PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don’t really care about AI (though I will confess to watching it), but
>> this is yet another example of how important it is to contextualize TV
>> ratings this year. The 2.3 rating was more than twice as high as what ABC
>> has been running in that slot this season, the highest rated show for ABC
>> in that slot in 4 years, the highest rated show of Sunday night, and was
>> roughly equivalent to the rating of the first episode of The Voice this
>> season (2.4). The 2.3 Rating exceeded industry predictions (most had it
>> coming in at under 2.0). AI functioned as a strong lead in to a new show on
>> ABC (can’t remember the name and don’t feel like looking it up), which gave
>> it a good number. The rating was 20% lower than the rating of the last
>> season premier of AI on Fox two years ago, which is in the ballpark of the
>> ratings declined shown by programs like the Daytona 500 and World Series
>> over that period.
>>
>> Which is to say, in the 2018 TV environment, a 2.3 rating is very good,
>> and probably worth whatever ABC paid for AI.
>>
>> The real question to me is will AI be able to maintain ratings near this
>> level (not sure what the typical season ratings curve looks like for AI).
>> Even by the standards of this kind of show I thought it was corny as hell.
>> I was surprise how well Richie did, and he would have an interesting take
>> on becoming a pop star, as he was one of those manufactured pop (R&B) stars
>> who actually had a really nice voice. I am not a huge Katie Perry fan, but
>> I thought at least she would be interesting (nope). I don’t know anything
>> about the country singer (I had never heard of the country singer on The
>> Voice when it premiered either, but found him to be both an interesting
>> personality and one of the better male voices in current popular music;
>> none of that seemed true of the AI guy - Luke something).
>>
>> The first episode did remind me of the difference between The Voice and
>> AI. While in many ways The Voice is a better show, it seems to produce
>> winners who are mediocre in the actual music business - partly I think now
>> because it seems to cull from opening acts, lounge acts, state fair acts.
>> The winner tends to be one of the best acts that has already proved it can
>> not appeal to a major fraction of the pop music audience. AI at least
>> presents itself as culling from acts that have not yet really had a chance
>> - so while they are often more raw and undeveloped, there seems to be a
>> chance that occasionally they will find a real pop music star (and,
>> occasionally, they have - which is more than The Voice can say).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 1:43 PM Steve Timko < steveti...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> They had a 2.3 in the demo and TV by the Numbers called that solid.
>>> That's a lot of money to pay for 2.3. He said Seacrest had a low profile.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/tv-ratings-sunday-march-11-2018/
>>>
>>>
>>> Not sent from an iPhone
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>> --
>> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "TVorNotTV" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "TVorNotTV" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
-- 
Sent from Gmail Mobile

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to