RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,677
Posts: 5,430,163
Members: 24,826
Currently online: 506
Newest member: ragster


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy > Battlestar Galactica & Caprica

Battlestar Galactica & Caprica This forum was created by man. It rebelled. It evolved. And it has a plan.

 
 
Thread Tools
Old April 23 2008, 02:10 AM   #361
StarTrek1701
Fleet Captain
 
StarTrek1701's Avatar
 
Re: Ratings are in !

Russ wrote: View Post
Stayed very consistent in terms of viewers (down just 3%), but a drop in adults 18-49 (-11%).

Just like last week, the 1.1 national rating should translate to a 1.3 coverage. We'll have a confirmation of last week's coverage rating next week.

Here's an updated chart. Again, note that the ratings for the past two week's could be off, but not likely by more than +/- 0.1 points:

Damn. Those ratings really took a nosedive didn't they?
StarTrek1701 is offline  
Old April 28 2008, 05:43 AM   #362
Afroed
Ensign
 
Re: Ratings are in !

TheMasterOfOrion wrote: View Post
DarthMarley wrote: View Post
The "real reasonj' for the ratings slide is they didn't kill off Starbuck sooner and keep her dead.
So you're a Dirk Benedict fan then ?



DarthMarley, don't hold your breath waiting for EarthStorm2
Will starbuck be in Caprica?
Afroed is offline  
Old April 28 2008, 07:20 AM   #363
Russ
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Ohio
View Russ's Twitter Profile
Re: Ratings are in !

I told you I could have been off by +/- 0.1 points.

The second episode of the fourth season got a 1.4 coverage rating, not a 1.3. We'll get a confirmation of the third episode's coverage rating no later than next Monday. It's possible that episode also got a 1.4 coverage instead of a 1.3 considering how close the two episodes were in viewers (1.80M vs. 1.74M).

SCI FI also released the Live+7 day numbers for the BSG premiere. It improved to a 1.9 coverage rating (+19%) and 2.65M viewers (+510,000/24%).

Last edited by Russ; April 28 2008 at 07:27 AM.
Russ is offline  
Old April 30 2008, 06:47 AM   #364
TheMasterOfOrion
Fleet Captain
 
TheMasterOfOrion's Avatar
 
Re: Ratings are in !

The 1.4 is ok but it was doing a lot better last season. At skiffy there was a discussion about "Book Cooking" ? Showing only Live+7 numbers in their press release could be considered creative accounting. Skiffy have invested a lot of money in the series so showing the inflated figures might suit their needs better. As many of you know there's a British entertainment channel Skyone which also broadcasts the new BSG series, too bad it gets beat by re-runs of Bionic Woman.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008...ngs.television

Channel 5's CSI: Crime Scene Investigation at the same time attracted an audience of 2.8 million, a 12% share and the channel's biggest audience of the night.
On Sky One at the same time, the opening episode of the fourth and final series of sci-fi drama Battlestar Galactica drew 243,000 viewers between 9pm and 10pm, a share of 1.2% in multichannel homes.
Episode two averaged 200,000 viewers, a multichannel share of 1.3% between 10pm and 11pm.
On ITV2 in the 9pm hour, the sixth instalment of the US import Bionic Woman starring Michelle Ryan pulled in an audience of 664,000 and a 3% share in multichannel homes.
Appears to have lost 43,000 viewers between episode 401 and 402

With these kind of numbers I don't think Skyone will be giving Caprica their financial support
TheMasterOfOrion is offline  
Old April 30 2008, 07:19 AM   #365
Phily B
Fleet Captain
 
Phily B's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
View Phily B's Twitter Profile
Re: Ratings are in !

To be fair, ratings are down on sci-fi in general. I think ECW gets a respectable rating, but thats not even sci-fi and it was getting about 2.5s when it started.
Phily B is offline  
Old April 30 2008, 07:26 AM   #366
archeryguy1701
Rear Admiral
 
archeryguy1701's Avatar
 
Location: Cheyenne, WY
Send a message via Yahoo to archeryguy1701
Re: Ratings are in !

^Unfortunately that has been mentioned and shown in graphs several times, but it doesn't seem to be relevant. All that matters is that BSG is down.
__________________
"If it weren't for stupid, difficult races, there'd simply be no point to living."

Sometimes you just gotta roll the hard six- Bill Adama
archeryguy1701 is offline  
Old April 30 2008, 11:50 AM   #367
TheMasterOfOrion
Fleet Captain
 
TheMasterOfOrion's Avatar
 
Re: Ratings are in !

NewBSG and Skiffy may be down but the scifi genre is not, certainly not when Cloverfield, Transformers and Sunshine are making money at the cinema while tv shows like Terminator SCC and Heroes are pulling high viewers. Therefore it is not ludicrous to assume the battlestar writers and the scifi channel have been doing something wrong
TheMasterOfOrion is offline  
Old April 30 2008, 01:59 PM   #368
stonester1
Rear Admiral
 
stonester1's Avatar
 
Re: Ratings are in !

No, it's ludicrous to say low ratings=writers doing something wrong.
__________________
"New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled, the humiliating question arises, 'Why then are you not taking part in them?' " - H. G. Wells
stonester1 is offline  
Old April 30 2008, 06:02 PM   #369
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: Ratings are in !

TheMasterOfOrion wrote: View Post
Therefore it is not ludicrous to assume the battlestar writers and the scifi channel have been doing something wrong
The writers and Sci-Fi have made a very dark, sometimes depressing show with main characters who can be difficult to like. This is not the same as "bad," but it is something that the average TV viewer is not going to tolerate. Which is their right, but that they tune out is not an indictment of the quality of the writing. Do the declining numbers of people reading short literary fiction mean that all those authors are writing bad stories?
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline  
Old April 30 2008, 06:29 PM   #370
stonester1
Rear Admiral
 
stonester1's Avatar
 
Re: Ratings are in !

Exactly. This is getting back into the "ratings = quality" bs, when we know they don't.

Who knows? Maybe most "mainstream" science fiction "fans" really DO like nice, safe "feel good escapism" in their science fiction. Stuff that doesn't really stretch their boundaries, paradigms or challenge assumptions. Similar trends can also be spotted in science fiction literature sales, too.


Gep Malakai wrote: View Post
TheMasterOfOrion wrote: View Post
Therefore it is not ludicrous to assume the battlestar writers and the scifi channel have been doing something wrong
The writers and Sci-Fi have made a very dark, sometimes depressing show with main characters who can be difficult to like. This is not the same as "bad," but it is something that the average TV viewer is not going to tolerate. Which is their right, but that they tune out is not an indictment of the quality of the writing. Do the declining numbers of people reading short literary fiction mean that all those authors are writing bad stories?
__________________
"New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled, the humiliating question arises, 'Why then are you not taking part in them?' " - H. G. Wells
stonester1 is offline  
Old April 30 2008, 07:23 PM   #371
Samuel T. Cogley
Vice Admiral
 
Samuel T. Cogley's Avatar
 
Location: Hold still, Jim.
Re: Ratings are in !

TheMasterOfOrion wrote: View Post
Therefore it is not ludicrous to assume the battlestar writers and the scifi channel have been doing something wrong
If BSG is wrong, I don't want to be right!
__________________
"If I didn't keep getting distracted by an avatar showing a sombrero'd dog getting his engineering hull penis substitute cut off I'd probably say that the above post was a point well made." - ITL
Samuel T. Cogley is offline  
Old April 30 2008, 09:21 PM   #372
archeryguy1701
Rear Admiral
 
archeryguy1701's Avatar
 
Location: Cheyenne, WY
Send a message via Yahoo to archeryguy1701
Re: Ratings are in !

TMoO, I think you missed the point of that statement. Sure, the genre may be doing fine, but if less people are watching SciFi, at least live, is there any particular reason why BSG must be going up to prove it's good when everything else in the channel is down?
__________________
"If it weren't for stupid, difficult races, there'd simply be no point to living."

Sometimes you just gotta roll the hard six- Bill Adama
archeryguy1701 is offline  
Old May 2 2008, 11:58 AM   #373
TheMasterOfOrion
Fleet Captain
 
TheMasterOfOrion's Avatar
 
Re: Ratings are in !

Skiffy is showing little enthusiasm for Caprica but it might support Tinman, which pulled 4.2 in the ratings
TheMasterOfOrion is offline  
Old May 2 2008, 05:26 PM   #374
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: Ratings are in !

TheMasterOfOrion wrote: View Post
Skiffy is showing little enthusiasm for Caprica but it might support Tinman, which pulled 4.2 in the ratings
That's completely nonsensical. Sci-fi has ordered the Caprica pilot, and it's being made. Where's the Tin Man series?
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline  
Old May 2 2008, 05:40 PM   #375
Samuel T. Cogley
Vice Admiral
 
Samuel T. Cogley's Avatar
 
Location: Hold still, Jim.
Re: Ratings are in !

Hirogen Alpha wrote: View Post
TheMasterOfOrion wrote: View Post
Skiffy is showing little enthusiasm for Caprica but it might support Tinman, which pulled 4.2 in the ratings
That's completely nonsensical.
You expected something different?
__________________
"If I didn't keep getting distracted by an avatar showing a sombrero'd dog getting his engineering hull penis substitute cut off I'd probably say that the above post was a point well made." - ITL
Samuel T. Cogley is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Tags
ratings

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:26 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.