Ratings II
- Thread starter Mr. A
- Start date
LOL! I am saving them as I see them. I have also deleted the SGU Sucks smiley I created for SGUS from the Post Icons group. I am going to delete the other custom smileys I made for that site too. Ill create new ones for this site!
Mr. A
Super Moderator +
johnsheppard
GateFans Noob
Just found french audience sadly they only give them for the 3 eps that are aired the same evening.
sgu ep 1-2-3 522000
ep 4-5-6 476000
ep 7-8-9 437000
So the same result than in other countries around the world despite what some said what about the sgu success all around the world.
It'd be interesting to know how many SGA got on the same channel.
sgu ep 1-2-3 522000
ep 4-5-6 476000
ep 7-8-9 437000
So the same result than in other countries around the world despite what some said what about the sgu success all around the world.
It'd be interesting to know how many SGA got on the same channel.
Mr. A
Super Moderator +
Thanks, Johnsheppard! I would also like to have some comparison basis to determine how bad that is. All I can use atm is Germany - which I believe is a similar market - where the show was getting 500,000 viewers, so roughly the same ballpark.
Do you have ratings for other shows, like SGA?
johnsheppard
GateFans Noob
For this channel it looks no so good but it's not a big channel but it's not a cripted one.I only noticed they lost audience too in 3 weeks.
It'd be interesting to compare with SGA.this channel has arleady aired and keep airing too but I have not found these ones yet.
Thank you for those numbers.
I am working on the new ratings chart for this site, but I dont have any international numbers, just US numbers. If you can PM them to me or post them like you just did, perhaps I can create a chart with those numbers in them too. It will be ready by the time SGU goes to air.
I am working on the new ratings chart for this site, but I dont have any international numbers, just US numbers. If you can PM them to me or post them like you just did, perhaps I can create a chart with those numbers in them too. It will be ready by the time SGU goes to air.
johnsheppard
GateFans Noob
Sgu started with 2.1% of audience and now 1.7.
I just read an article written 2 weeks ago that said we had to wait 2 weeks to see the tendency.BTW you can see the tendency.
The average of audience for this channel seems to be 2.4%.
It's all I know by now.
I just read an article written 2 weeks ago that said we had to wait 2 weeks to see the tendency.BTW you can see the tendency.
The average of audience for this channel seems to be 2.4%.
It's all I know by now.
Briangate78
GateFans Noob
Well wanted to post this on GW, but since I am down to one post a week and my Anger Management specialist said to limit it to one a week there, so I don't get a condescending reply from someone, I wanted to share some info and my theories about ratings..
Well here we go, this is how I see it. You know the show "Fringe" which has been deemed on the bubble to be cancelled had one of the largest lifts for DVR out of all the network shows. If those numbers were live, or even Live+SD the show would be renewed, no questions asked. As you know why Family Guy and The Simpsons do so well is the 18 to 49 demo and their syndication/reruns. The amount of money pouring in from Syndication is CRAZY!! You can imagine how many people want to kill Charlie Sheen right now, since Two and a Half Men is in the same boat as Family Guy when it comes to Syndication. Ok I promise I will turn this into Stargate soon, don't worry. lol. Anyway, Science Fiction shows don't have a problem finding an audience, they really don't. They have the viewers, except since Science Fiction fans tend to be younger and more Tech Savy. Which is always why when you add DVR to the numbers the age median usually drops. Right now DVR is in over 30% of the households and growing. I don't buy the whole internet watching folks. Because, I don't think it has made a significant impact. Sadly, scripted shows and dramas tend to get DVR'd the most. Live reality TV like American Idol and Ghost Hunters(Which btw they are not doing as great as they used to) people tend to watch Live.
Now getting to Stargate. SGA and SG-1 may have lost live viewers, but they did not lose total viewers. People still showed up to the TV to watch even if it was the next day or so. They both had good numbers in syndication and reruns, you guys saw what I posted from a couple of years ago. Now here comes SGU, a more serial show, which started off excellent in ratings, then to what we call a "Fat Kid doing a belly flop in the wading pool" SGU did not lose live to DVR, people just stopped watching. As I posted and MS posted, SGU's Live+7 was hovering around 1.5 Million. Which for Total viewers is pathetic. As I keep saying SGA was hitting highs of 2.5 Million viewers for their key eps in the final season. If people on GW want to believe that SGA was cancelled by Syfy, I don't know what to say, maybe, ignorance is Bliss? Or it is like one tree short of hanging a hammock? I dunno.
I'm just pissed off, that we had a product that was doing very well, and now we have nothing in the hopper. I strongly believe the Sci FI shows that we love are still being craved, but it is our own technology that is killing our favorite shows. As per SGU, it just did not have an audience, because quite frankley it was boring and slow at times, not all the time, but it only takes one bad episode to do damage. I look at the top DVD sales for 2009 and 2010, and a lot of the shows are Science Fiction/Adventure/Fantasy) The top grossing movie for 2009 was "Transformers 2" which is Science Fiction, obviously. I guess my point is, Movies and DVD sales do well for Science Fiction/Fantasy, but TV series have to battle the tech savy DVR users.
Well here we go, this is how I see it. You know the show "Fringe" which has been deemed on the bubble to be cancelled had one of the largest lifts for DVR out of all the network shows. If those numbers were live, or even Live+SD the show would be renewed, no questions asked. As you know why Family Guy and The Simpsons do so well is the 18 to 49 demo and their syndication/reruns. The amount of money pouring in from Syndication is CRAZY!! You can imagine how many people want to kill Charlie Sheen right now, since Two and a Half Men is in the same boat as Family Guy when it comes to Syndication. Ok I promise I will turn this into Stargate soon, don't worry. lol. Anyway, Science Fiction shows don't have a problem finding an audience, they really don't. They have the viewers, except since Science Fiction fans tend to be younger and more Tech Savy. Which is always why when you add DVR to the numbers the age median usually drops. Right now DVR is in over 30% of the households and growing. I don't buy the whole internet watching folks. Because, I don't think it has made a significant impact. Sadly, scripted shows and dramas tend to get DVR'd the most. Live reality TV like American Idol and Ghost Hunters(Which btw they are not doing as great as they used to) people tend to watch Live.
Now getting to Stargate. SGA and SG-1 may have lost live viewers, but they did not lose total viewers. People still showed up to the TV to watch even if it was the next day or so. They both had good numbers in syndication and reruns, you guys saw what I posted from a couple of years ago. Now here comes SGU, a more serial show, which started off excellent in ratings, then to what we call a "Fat Kid doing a belly flop in the wading pool" SGU did not lose live to DVR, people just stopped watching. As I posted and MS posted, SGU's Live+7 was hovering around 1.5 Million. Which for Total viewers is pathetic. As I keep saying SGA was hitting highs of 2.5 Million viewers for their key eps in the final season. If people on GW want to believe that SGA was cancelled by Syfy, I don't know what to say, maybe, ignorance is Bliss? Or it is like one tree short of hanging a hammock? I dunno.
I'm just pissed off, that we had a product that was doing very well, and now we have nothing in the hopper. I strongly believe the Sci FI shows that we love are still being craved, but it is our own technology that is killing our favorite shows. As per SGU, it just did not have an audience, because quite frankley it was boring and slow at times, not all the time, but it only takes one bad episode to do damage. I look at the top DVD sales for 2009 and 2010, and a lot of the shows are Science Fiction/Adventure/Fantasy) The top grossing movie for 2009 was "Transformers 2" which is Science Fiction, obviously. I guess my point is, Movies and DVD sales do well for Science Fiction/Fantasy, but TV series have to battle the tech savy DVR users.
shavedape
Well Known GateFan
I don't really disagree with you here but to be honest I don't think it's the technology that is hurting sci-fi as much as you have posited. You hit on the truth earlier in your post when you compared SG1/SGA to SGU. SG1 and SGA were considered episodic shows whereas SGU was serialized. This is an important distinction to make because serialized shows simply do not have replay value. Even back as far as the 80's when night time soaps like "Dynasty" and "Dallas" were all the rage they basically had no rerun value because they were serialized shows. The problem with reruns of serialized shows is that one can't just tune in randomly and know what's going on, which is a huge turn off to casual viewers. Casual viewers affect ratings.
As it is people can record (or pop in a DVD of) SG1 or SGA and watch episodes as they like as it doesn't require them to know literally every nuance of what is going on. With SGU if you DVR an episode you need to be up to speed on all the preceding episodes to know what is going on with who and why they're doing what they're doing and why you should care about what they're doing, etc. etc. etc.
I really think episodic verses serialized is the main issue here and the ability to record and watch a show at one's leisure is secondary to this fact regardless of live ratings. You're certainly not going to pick up live viewers if it requires much effort on the part of viewers to edify themselves on exactly what is going on. With episodic sci-fi shows all one needs to know, basically, is who are the good guys in any given episode and who are the bad guys. The interpersonal details are usually figured out over time.
Obviously the way ratings will be counted in the future has to change and fit with the new technologies but that won't change the fact that people don't watch boring, serialized shows. And I guess the key word here is boring as other serialized shows like "Lost" at least weren't boring -- dumb at times, but not boring. And I don't see years and years of syndicated reruns for "Lost" compared to say SG1 or SGA which can continue to cycle the way Star Trek episodes do thanks to their episodic nature.
Basically the whole point of a serialized show is to have a viewer watch from the first episode to the last episode. When I come home after work and I sit down in front of the TV I don't want to watch something that requires me to keep watching day after day after day just to see how it ends. I want a story told to me in one hours time and that's it, preferably by characters I know and care for. And even if I've seen an episode before there is still the enjoyment of the payoff of a good story being told in an hours time. I can't get this with a serialized show because at the end of that hour there will be no ending, no payoff, and hence no satisfaction.
This is just the way it is with viewer preferences and any producer worth his or her salt knows it. BW/RC had to know this going into SGU, they had to know that doing a serialized show would be a ratings challenge yet they still opted to do it. JM's complaints about the ratings system are ridiculous in the face of the fact that serialized shows simply do not do as well as episodic shows in the long run. TPTB in toto knew this going in but still chose go the serialized route. The lackluster ratings followed accordingly, regardless of the medium that the ratings were counted with, because SGU was a serialized show, and a boring one at that.
EXCELLENT analysis .
ITA. Its the style of the show and the fact that it was serialized that ruined it in a big way. When people were seeing advertising of the show after ratings started to slide, they were shown scenes from previous episodes, and shown character moments between characters they knew nothing about. The sad part is that even if they tuned into EVERY episode they still would not know what these characters were about. They would only see their behavior and watch them as they spent 30 episodes doing basically nothing but reacting. TBH, Sanctuary is a bit serialized, but not so much so that you cant pick a random episode and enjoy the characters and the story. The existence of shows like Sanctuary show that it can be done, and that it was attempted but failed in SGU.
I agree with this. Im not sure the show would have worked even if the characters were right and the lighting was right. Without a defined path to follow for an overall mission, everything done in the show seems pointless. Voyager's overall mission was to get home. We knew that no matter what the episode was, at the end the ship would be pointed towards the Alpha Quadrant towards home. In SGU, the "mission" is to investigate a (possibly) artificial signal in the background radiation of the universe? Not much of a path, if you ask me. Even Gilligan's Island had a clearer long term mission, as did BSG 2.0.
ITA. Its the style of the show and the fact that it was serialized that ruined it in a big way. When people were seeing advertising of the show after ratings started to slide, they were shown scenes from previous episodes, and shown character moments between characters they knew nothing about. The sad part is that even if they tuned into EVERY episode they still would not know what these characters were about. They would only see their behavior and watch them as they spent 30 episodes doing basically nothing but reacting. TBH, Sanctuary is a bit serialized, but not so much so that you cant pick a random episode and enjoy the characters and the story. The existence of shows like Sanctuary show that it can be done, and that it was attempted but failed in SGU.
Yes, and the fact that the first season was SO SLOW and boring made it a hard sell to watch any more of it after about episode 5. Season 2 started okay, but because of the damage to the show done by season 1, it was irreparable. It would take a whole new season to fix the damage and start building anything new. And still, the characters remained unknown and basically forgettable. Things happen, they react. Still not a team.
I agree. Episodic science fiction works when there is a clear path it is taking. The "mission" added in season 2 was thrown in only because viewers were complaining that there wasnt one. Originally, Joseph Mallozzi said that the show was basically "open ended". The fact that the showrunners centered the show on the awful characters did not help, since it didnt prompt the viewers to care enough about them to know more.
This is why the show failed. If the idea was to use the soap opera format to draw in women, then the dark spaceship and generic male characters failed that attempt. Males do not necessarily watch shows to follow a serialized story or romantic entanglements between characters. It can add, but it was the center of SGU.
I agree with this. Im not sure the show would have worked even if the characters were right and the lighting was right. Without a defined path to follow for an overall mission, everything done in the show seems pointless. Voyager's overall mission was to get home. We knew that no matter what the episode was, at the end the ship would be pointed towards the Alpha Quadrant towards home. In SGU, the "mission" is to investigate a (possibly) artificial signal in the background radiation of the universe? Not much of a path, if you ask me. Even Gilligan's Island had a clearer long term mission, as did BSG 2.0.
Mr. A
Super Moderator +
johnsheppard
GateFans Noob
Well said.
If sgu started well the series didn't reach SGA rating for a premiere and season 1.Then they lost quickly live viewers and the steadily audience was around 1.00 when SGA's ones was around 1.7 last season.And you know that.So sgu has never made as good as SGA.In addition this series couldn't be profitable cos this show cost more to produce since the begining.That pisses me off cos it was one of reasons of SGA cancellation claimed by TPTB.
Have you any idea how are DVDs sales for SGA Vs sgu.I think MGM was more interested in these sales and for I saw SGA did better.
Mr. A
Super Moderator +
Look, I am going to concede to Briangate that DVRing does hurt the ratings and renewal prospects of scripted drama as compared to Live or reality TV shows. I don't buy the "tech savvy" argument though, but just that the target audience of successful shows A18-49 are the ones that use technological alternatives to live viewing even if its their favorite show. I read, for instance, that Two-and-a-half Men also gets DVRed a lot. Non-scripted shows get watched live because they're the "hip" thing to be discussed with the guys later on or the next day at work. A few hours later or the next evening it's already old news and one is left out of all the cool circles. There's really no way to combat that.
I also agree with Shavedape that serialized shows won't do as well nowadays (compared to the days of Dallas & Dynasty with less alternatives), have lower rewatch value on DVD and are completely worthless for syndication. But I don't think that is such a big factor as to solely decide the fate of a drama. There's also the counterbalancing "soap opera" effect producers of serialized shows are seeking, which keeps the fans coming back every week - otherwise 24 wouldn't have been such a hit.
But Shavedape mentions an additional factor, which for me is key: SGU was boring... In the end, Brad Wright's perhaps accidental but brilliant epigram still holds: "If the show is good, you'll watch it. If it isn't, you won't". Since scripted drama has a inherent live ratings disadvantage, and on top of that sci-fi drama limits the audience even further, the only option left is to either stop making sci-fi drama (a path SyFy seems to be taking lately) or accept that sci-fi is a niche show and only make very good, top-notch sci-fi shows. I.e. forget about making sci-fi series that are designed to appeal to the masses (but don't), and concentrate on the hard-core loyal sci-fi fans who will stay at home and watch the show no matter what. If auto manufacturers thought the way TV producers do, we'd all be driving VW and Ford hatchbacks - or worse. There would be no Porsche's, BMW's, Mercedes and SUVs. Those are niche products, that don't sell as much as popular cars, but the companies are doing very well, and the fans of sports cars and utility vehicles can thank them for that.
So TV producers should cut the crap about making half-hearted and B science fiction series and go for the good stuff! Watch Roddenberry's video on compromising his idea, make shows like ST:TOS and ST:ENT and quit the Defying Gravity, Flash Forward, Caprica, SGU, teen vampire-werewolf crap!
My 2 cents
Briangate78
GateFans Noob
DVR 's excuse does not hold water for SGU like it did for SGA. Atlantis as I said averaged over 2.1 Million viewers after Live+7, SGU is averaging over 1.5 Million viewers. That is a 600,000 viewers deficet. Also 2nd and 3rd runs were pulling in around a 0.7 to 0.8 rating for SGA. SGU 2nd runs have about a 0.3 rating. Makes you wonder why they pulled the 8pm slot.
SGU failed, now if MGM is smart they will resurrect the classic SG with a modern twist but still keeping true to it's roots.
SexyDexy
GateFans Noob
I agree that serialized shows have to work harder in some ways to be successful, however I don't agree that there can't be a "payoff" at the end of a serialized episode. A well-written serialized show will have many character arcs running through it, and each episode should have some payoff or another relating to these arcs. These smaller payoffs will provide satisfaction, as the show also builds towards the larger payoffs reserved for season finales. So each episode has some sort of "stepping stone" payoff leading up to bigger things. But each episode should also raise a new question or even a new "cliffhanger" so to speak, to keep the viewer addicted. It is difficult to write a serialized show that provides enough "payoff" in each episode but maintains the tension moving forward. Standard "soaps" fail to intrigue me because they generally don't have enough payoffs at all, they just string you along indefinitely. However, some serialized dramas I think are quite good at balancing the two - like True Blood Another show that I think does that very well right now is Vampire Diaries (haha okay some of you will laugh at that and just call it a soap, but it's very well written and has a good balance of action / character arc payoffs / and interesting characters). A show like Grey's Anatomy, on the other hand, just gets extremely frustrating after a while because you just get strung along forever - I think I made it less than six episodes before I couldn't stand that show any more.
I don't know about the replay value argument, but it is probably true that serialized shows don't have as good a replay value. That said, there are several serialized shows I will watch over and over again, but most of those have very hot actors in them that make it worth watching over and over Also, if the characters and the writing is strong, one should be able to come to a serialized show in the middle and get drawn in - even if you don't understand everything that is going on, you should still get sucked in enough that you might later go buy the DVD of all the earlier episodes.
I think the best balance is a combination of serialized and episodic, like Sanctuary, which was already pointed out. But if you are going to write a serialized show, you've got to be a good writer, and you've got to know what the heck you are doing. The writers for SGU had a lot of weaknesses, and not only did they reach too much by going for drama writing, but they reached too much by going for a very serialized format, imo.
Another show that I think does that very well right now is Vampire Diaries (haha okay some of you will laugh at that and just call it a soap, but it's very well written and has a good balance of action / character arc payoffs / and interesting characters). A show like Grey's Anatomy, on the other hand, just gets extremely frustrating after a while because you just get strung along forever - I think I made it less than six episodes before I couldn't stand that show any more.I don't know about the replay value argument, but it is probably true that serialized shows don't have as good a replay value. That said, there are several serialized shows I will watch over and over again, but most of those have very hot actors in them that make it worth watching over and over
Also, if the characters and the writing is strong, one should be able to come to a serialized show in the middle and get drawn in - even if you don't understand everything that is going on, you should still get sucked in enough that you might later go buy the DVD of all the earlier episodes.I think the best balance is a combination of serialized and episodic, like Sanctuary, which was already pointed out. But if you are going to write a serialized show, you've got to be a good writer, and you've got to know what the heck you are doing. The writers for SGU had a lot of weaknesses, and not only did they reach too much by going for drama writing, but they reached too much by going for a very serialized format, imo.