Discussion in 'Battlestar Galactica & Caprica' started by Archangel, Oct 10, 2006.
Oh, I'm sure you do. I just thought you'd enjoy that thread, if you hadn't already seen it .
I hadn't, mind you. An interesting read.
You bump a months old thread to show us a graph that doesn't even include the ratings from season 4.5? Why?
Actually, since that graph is curving back up by the end we could make the mathematically sound deduction that the ratings for 4.5 are up, not that they are. So you bump an old thread to show us the ratings data from last year which actually manages to destroy the point you were trying to make. Once again I must ask; Why?
The trend line makes it look like ratings have decline since season 3 but they really haven't. The ratings for seasons 3 and 4 are equivalent.
Do some people still actually equate the number of viewers with a show's quality? Too much faith in the tastes of the average TV viewer is what that is. I guess American Idol is the greatest program ever aired, Titanic is an insurmountable masterpiece of cinema, and 50 Cent is the second coming of Beethoven. Let's not even mention 'Twilight' -- the finest collection of bound words since the Bible.
Season 3 on average, maybe, but the front half is noticeably higher than S4 (and the back half noticeably lower).
You're also ignoring that the trend line continues to drop because of the rather-abysmal "Razor" ratings, and that it actually picks up for S4.
I think that with BSG people who are trying to prove a decline in quality are looking less at the numbers compared to other shows, and more at how they've lost half their audience since season 1.
^ But that's still numbers.
What's an audience anyhow? I don't live in a Nielson house (or whatever the term may be) but I don't watch the shows as they air. I find other, mainly illegal, ways of seeing the episodes and everyone else I know that watches the show (many people) do the same thing.
Plus, as good as season 1 was, it was still very tame compared to what we are getting now. I'm not going to make an argument that the show has gotten better (although I think it has) but it has certainly gotten uglier. BSG isn't that easy of a show to watch, and I can understand casual TV viewers might be turned off by it.
Not to mention, BSG's time slot has been brutal since the beginning, and Sci-Fi's airing of different seasons is enough to turn any casual fan anyway.
I'm not trying to start a stats battle here, because I don't have the research to back it up. However, I do think it's worth noting that just about everyone I know that watches BSG has caught onto it around about season 3.5. This is hardly definitive evidence, and I am NOT trying to pose it as such, but I imagine the reality of BSG's audience is much, much higher than that time-slot statistic indicates. And if that's the case, the audience level = quality argument is as flawed as the ratings argument.
Well, apparently the point that you were trying to make was not the one I got from your post.
To bring in my own anecdotal audience, half of the people I know who watch the show stopped at various points during season two. Hell, until I got my new job late last year I thought that everybody else I knew who watched it had quit. So my personal experience lines up perfectly with Sci-fi's numbers.
I suppose it's possible that, as the measured audience has shrunk, the non-measured audience has stayed the same or even grown. I just don't think it terribly likely.
This thread bump is a waste of time.
The show ends in two weeks so who gives a shit about ratings from 2008? Mods put this thread out of its well deserved misery.
Interesting. May I ask why they stopped watching? Was it because of the show itself or Sci-Fi's notorious hiatuses? Or maybe we just have friends with completely opposite tastes. I also should say that many of mine aren't necessarily fans of science fiction, either.
Nah, season 3 just has more data points so it's more spread out. The averages are approximately equal. Also, the highest S3 point and the lowest 2 S3 points really skew things. Take out those 3 outliers and the ratings look much more flat withing S3. You're trying to read too much with too few points.
Fairly certain it was the show, and not the hiatuses. All of them are SF fans, though.
To be fair, while a drop in ratings could indicate a loss of quality, it just as easily could indicate something else. BSG, especially the new one, fits a very specific taste that not everyone will be into. It literally depicts a world where life's a bitch and then you die. The show may not fit a lot of tastes, but that won't make it bad either.
Though, I doubt the hiatus helped either, as you will not that the very first major drop came after the first hiatus. The lack of change after the second big hiatus shouldn't be looked at too closely mainly because the ratings were already scraping the bottom of the barrel. The hiatus may have knocked the ratings down here, just like I'm pretty sure it did to Jericho. There are very serialized shows, and they don't work well with monster-gaps in them.
The problem here is that, as you said, it's really anecdotal. And my experience, for example, is completely different. Everyone I've introduced it to has literally soaked up the show from start to finish (that's through S4.0). And none of them has complained about any significant drop in quality on the way. I should point out that most of these people watched it on DVD.
Again, this really doesn't mean anything since it's such a small number of people.
Also, it's interesting to look at DVD sales in addition to ratings. I have a hard time digging up numbers. Here are the only sales figures I found, from The Numbers. I only found figures from the S2.5 DVD box set onwards. Also, all I found there were the total numbers for as long as the sets were within the top 30. Finally, these numbers are US only:
S2.5: Released September 19, 2006, entered the chart on #7, 3 weeks in the top 30, 263,516 units sold in that time, $8,997,580 earned in that time.
S3: Released March 18, 2008, entered the chart on #14, 4 weeks in the top 30, 303,458 units sold in that time, $11,821,313 earned in that time
Razor: Released December 4, 2007, entered the chart on #20, 1 week in the top 30, 147,768 units sold in that time, $2,953,882 earned in that time
S4.0: Released January 6, 2009, entered the chart on #6, 2 weeks in the top 30, 248,638 units sold in that time, $8,834,889 earned in that time
And here is a link (from the end of 2007, I must add) stating that nuBSG was doing very well in terms of DVD sales. I found some other sources saying it was doing well, but this was the only one where I was actually familiar with the source:
Battlestar Goes Boldy Into The DVD Universe (New York Times, Television)
Actually, that would be Baywatch, which possibly isn't far from the truth!
Back to ratings, really who gives a shit. Beside, Sci-Fi might actually be clued up enough to realise that there's money to be made outside of questionable and arbitrary numbers.
There might be money to be made, but not by them; it's Universal who would be making any moneys from outside the broadcasts. (Though with Universal-the-production-company and Sci-Fi serving the same corporate overlords, there may be some nudging from above to keep the show on the air.)
^^ As far as Universal's concerned, Sci-Fi is a glorified shop-window
Yes, but it's generally the shop and not the manufacturers who decides just what to put in the window.
Unless it's a part of a chain or a franchise that belongs to the manufacturer, that is.
Separate names with a comma.