Are you saying that viewers are incapable of deciding what they like and don’t like and sit blindly watching something because it follows a programme they like. We all have free will Darren and the ability to watch something we like and to switch it off if we don’t like it.
Not enough viewers liked SGU, the reasons have been listed over and over. Many gave it a chance and then stopped watching, how is that the fault of Wrestling. Wrestling brings in the revenue to Syfy to enable them to afford new scripted shows, but these shows still have to perform on their own merits and in relation to how expensive they are.
SGU was a very expensive show that didn’t live up to its ratings expectations, it didn’t gain a new audience and could barely sustain its existing one. How is that the fault of Wrestling or Syfy. Syfy cannot demand what their audience watch. Wrestling will always be popular as are many of the big sports, you cannot compare a sporting phenonema like wrestling to science fiction which has always had a niche market.
SGU was given the same chance to succeed as every other show that airs on Syfy. Other shows on Syfy have achieved much higher ratings than SGU, so that shows that science fiction can achieve good ratings if the show is appealing enough.
The ratings for SGU had already plummeted while it was on Friday night. They were already on a downward spiral. But you feel that Syfy should have been happy with these mediocre ratings. Why do you think that Brad Wright and MGM decided to end SGA for SGU. They did it to gain a larger audience and to appeal to the mainstream audience, but they failed at both. Why do you think they should have settled for lower figures.
SGU was moved to Tuesday in the hope of achieving more viewers. But it didn't work – because the problem was with the show itself. If it was due to the competition and the day why did WH13 manage to gain much higher ratings in the same time slot and with the same competition. Simple answer is because its a more popular show.
SGA were achieving higher numbers in its 5th season than SGU was at the end of its first and would most likey have retained higher numbers if the writing and overall storytelling had not declined so much over the years.
SGU took the franchise in a new direction that just didn’t appeal to enough viewers, plain and simple, if those viewers chose to watch wrestling or something else then that is because they didn’t think SGU was interesting enough or warranted their viewing for whatever reason. That is the right of every viewer.
If Wrestling and Syfy were the cause of SGU failing then how can other shows manage to flourish. How do you explain that. How do you explain why SGU failed in every other country it was aired in and there was no wresting or change of date or time to blame. How do you explain why it has failed so dismally in the UK. Why do you chose to ignore that main reason that SGU failed, it didn’t appeal to enough viewers. Why did 1 million stop watching in season one when it was on friday night, the so called prime time. Why did it continue to fail on Tuesday night when other shows flourished.
I doubt Syfy or MGM would have been happy with 1m viewers when they could achieve the same viewership for shows that cost a fraction of the cost, what business sense would that make. They cancelled SGA to increase their viewership, or so they hoped. Why would MGM put more money into SGU than they put into SGA and be content with lower ratings and less revenue.
Shows like Wh13 have clearly shown that Syfy can indeed achieve higher ratings for their original scripted shows and that is down to the originality and talent of those producing those shows. WH13 has succeeded because it appeals to the viewing audience, SGU didn’t.
Sanctuary is a far cheaper show than SGU and maybe the ratings that they are achieving now are sufficient because of the cheaper cost of the show. I think Syfy are aware that a monday 10pm slot is more likely to get less viewers than a 9pm slot on any other day of the week. But SGU didn’t just fail on one night, it failed on every night it was shown on, it failed in other countries when the night was never changed and there was no wrestling in the equation.
blackhawlk | May 5 @ 4:54 am
@blackhawlk: Lead-ins and lead-outs matter. If they didn’t — if every TV viewer sat down with TV Guide at dinner time and plotted out their strategy for television viewing that night — then Urban Legends wouldn’t have risen 211 percent when moved to the post-wrestling time slot.
This is because most viewers will simply watch what’s on, unless they know that another show they like is on another network. Something has to motivate them to click that remote, whether positive (“NCIS is about to start over on CBS!”) or negative (“Oh geez, can we please not watch this?”).
I’ve never denied that SGU had problems in holding on to viewers, or that it was an expensive show (and thus likely necessitated higher ratings to justify its renewal). Syfy is right to point out that that initial fall-off from episode 103 to episode 110 is significant. What I do deny is that the scheduling hasn’t impacted the ratings just as much.
@All: For me, this is about one thing: 8 to 10 p.m. on Friday nights. These are two incredibly important hours for a scripted drama in the science fiction category, which we know already has an uphill climb to appeal to casual viewers (especially in the fall and spring seasons). We’ve even lost Syfy’s 10 p.m. hour now, and Sanctuary‘s live viewership is down 40 percent.
Whatever else we might have to say about wrestling, network branding, SGU‘s inability to hold on to the viewers it started out with, etc. — by not airing scripted drama on Friday nights, the network is doing a disservice to science fiction television.
If this article comes across as bemoaning the cancellation of SGU in particular, I’ve missed the target. It’s just the most obvious example, because it is a show that was moved off Friday nights and then cancelled. Would things have turned out different if it had stayed on Friday? Syfy suggests that the answer is no. But, of course, we’ll never know.
Darren Sumner | May 5 @ 5:37 am
:beckettu:Darren – SGU was loosing viewers on FRIDAY night. How long did you want them to wait before doing anything.
I’m really not sure what point you are trying to make. You are making contradictory statements. On the one hand you say that wrestling is killing science fiction but then you say it helped SGU as a lead in. Which is it. Wrestling has been airing on Fridays since 2005 and I haven’t seen any articles accusing it of killing science fiction before.
As explained numerous times now, the change from Friday happened because the ratings were plummeting. Did you expect Syfy to sit back and do nothing – just to hope that they would improve. Why should they continue to take a loss in the dim hope that the ratings would improve. They took action and tried a new day. Yes a competitive day, but also one with the most viewers. If SGU appealed it would have stood its ground, but it didn’t and the ratings went into cancellation territory. SGU was already cancelled before it was changed to Monday and the ratings didn’t really impact the outcome anymore.
You have based your article on contradictions and what-ifs and feel the need to tell Syfy how they should run their business. SGU had 2 years to prove itself and find an audience, more than most shows would ever get.
You also insinuate that your viewing preference is more important than the Wrestling viewer who is in the habit of making bad life choices. I don’t think Syfy can take into account the preferences of individual viewers. They have to take the overall numbers into account and consider their profit margins, otherwise they would go under and then there would be no new scripted shows to air on Friday nights at all. Business’s cannot operate without making a profit.
I watch shows on their own merits and have found some of my favourite shows from just flicking around with the remote control. I’m sure this is the same for many viewers. I may tune into something that looks interesting and because it followed a favourite programme, but I would quickly SWITCH OFF if I didn’t like it. That’s how a show gains an audience. They keep watching if they like it and stop if they don’t. SGU had an audience but not enough kept watching.
blackhawlk | May 5 @ 6:28 am
Yep!Indeed, notice how quickly Darren "went away" after even such a relatively light paddleing
I really have to stay away from this thread, its damaging my sanity.............
Anyone got a Gamma ray projecter......
Ser Scot A Ellison
First Lieutenant
Member Since
Apr 2010Posts
973Location
Columbia, SC
Re: Hatred towards Syfy and among other things
Brian,
Syfy sucks. They cancel good spec fiction television to show crap like wrestleing "Crossing over with John Edward" and "Ghost Hunters". Syfy sucks.
(and don't forget quality movies like "Mega-Piranha". Well done.)
UnknownXV
Probie
Member Since
May 2011Posts
12
Re: Hatred towards Syfy and among other things
It's not syfy's fault, or MGM really.. they made a great show and syfy has to consider the bigger picture.
The only people to blame are the majority of people who decided they didn't like the show for whatever reason. It's short-sightedness. Even if I didn't like the show, I would of tuned in and muted it so my "vote" so to speak counts, because I knew if SGU failed it's the end of stargate as a whole, at least for a good while.
Sigh. We've been screwed over by the majority, it's that simple.
I read that on his thread, they did not seem to even acknowledge that fact even after he said it. I can't believe how cruel some of them are.
Everybody should just green him for having the B@#s to put his neck out over there. :icon_e_wink:
And we're a bunch of Angels??
I think not.
Touche my friend, touche. But I would not outright attack somebody when they did nothing wrong.
Unfortunately for Brian, as someone even remotely connected to Syfy, It was bound to happen. Do I think it's wrong, yeah, he's being hoisted for things way beyong his "pay grade", do I find it interesting, yes, simply because some SGU fans are exhibiting the same behaviour that they found so "disgraceful" before. It's all well and good to proclaim "moral superiority", but morals aren't worth jack until they are tested.