PDA

View Full Version : SciFi Wire: Official SciFi Channel ratings for Season Ten



Pages : [1] 2 3

Dannygirl
March 11th, 2006, 08:53 PM
Pretty much what the title asked. Does anyone think that BSG's not airing new epi's in July with SG will hurt SG's ratings?

tofuchef
March 11th, 2006, 09:45 PM
i dont see how BSG would have anything to affect the ratings of SG....

the fifth man
March 11th, 2006, 10:03 PM
I don't think so. Enough people still tune in to watch SG-1 and SGA primarily. I don't think it will be a big problem.

star47
March 11th, 2006, 10:05 PM
I guess the only people it would affect might be the ones who are major fans of BSG, but since SG1 and Atlantis are on the same night, they also watch and enjoy them, but might not bother if BSG wasn't on.

At the same time, when BSG starts in October and SG1 and Atlantis are already in re-runs, it could hurt BSG for the people that only watch it because it's on after the other two. I'm one of those! I won't stay home on a Friday night just to watch BSG like I do when all three are on. But I WILL stay home to watch SG1 and Atlantis when they're on.

the fifth man
March 11th, 2006, 10:07 PM
At the same time, when BSG starts in October and SG1 and Atlantis are already in re-runs, it could hurt BSG for the people that only watch it because it's on after the other two. I'm one of those! I won't stay home on a Friday night just to watch BSG like I do when all three are on. But I WILL stay home to watch SG1 and Atlantis when they're on.

I know what you mean. I really like BSG, don't give me wrong, but I just enjoy SG-1 and SGA a little bit more.:)

Famous
March 11th, 2006, 11:33 PM
I guess the only people it would affect might be the ones who are major fans of BSG, but since SG1 and Atlantis are on the same night, they also watch and enjoy them, but might not bother if BSG wasn't on.

At the same time, when BSG starts in October and SG1 and Atlantis are already in re-runs, it could hurt BSG for the people that only watch it because it's on after the other two. I'm one of those! I won't stay home on a Friday night just to watch BSG like I do when all three are on. But I WILL stay home to watch SG1 and Atlantis when they're on.


I'm much the same way - I like BSG, but I watch it more for being after Stargate. It stands to reason that there are also people who just watch Stargate because it's on before BSG. I don't think BSG premiering in October will really hurt Stargate's ratings, but it'll probably have some small effect.

OldManRivers
March 12th, 2006, 01:12 AM
Inless they change the schedual of the shows. BSG has a chance to gain a wider audience then SG ever will. Plus, this is the first time cable TV shows have started the season at this time. I think it's a very bold move, but could prove very good. I would hope they move BSG to a earlyer hour so it could gain more viewers. It's an exceptionaly well done show.

I doubt it would hurt SG in anyway since SG will be on it's mid season break. Of course, during the break they could take of SG completly and have some other shows along side BSG. That I'm all for.

kazzyk
March 12th, 2006, 02:45 AM
I think it will hurt Sg and SGA--clearly BSG is the one show sci-fi feels can go up against the networks and join the fall line up. I think it will do well. I am not a BSG fan but only because it isnt the type of sci-fi I like. I watched season 1 and no question it is a well done show.

Auralis
March 12th, 2006, 03:11 AM
I think scifi is trying to spread out the scifi friday more over the year by having two sets that run in exchange. first the gates, and when they are on break agalactica and some other show.
That way to get a better whole time coverage of their friday event.

ToasterOnFire
March 12th, 2006, 06:44 AM
I've seen plenty of comments from fans who use the Stargates to simply pass the time until BSG and they've said they won't bother tuning in on Friday until October. So yes, I do think the Stargates are going to take a bit of a ratings dive, maybe not for the premieres which always do well, but for the later episodes, because BSG isn't there to anchor it. If Dr. Who or another new show takes BSG's spot for July-October and does as well as BSG in the ratings then it could serve as an anchor.

Likewise, I think there's a good chance that BSG's ratings will go down because it's up against new network programming and it may also lose ratings because of casual BSG fans who really tune in for Stargate.

Honestly, I think it's a questionable decision and may very well have a negative impact on all Friday shows. Why alter the Friday night schedule that has been shown to bring in the ratings to fit in new shows rather than promoting them on a different scifi night?

MarshAngel
March 12th, 2006, 07:06 AM
There are a few other factors to consider. I don't know yet what day the new Scifi Series Eureka will premier this summer but its success or failure could make an impact on SGs ratings as well.

Jonzey
March 12th, 2006, 11:00 AM
I know BSG is like critically acclaimed and everything and some people seem to worship it (Sky One has sooooo many adverts for it, but none for the SG's), and yet the ratings for it are not much higher than SG-1's, and usually on par with Atlantis's. So how is it gonna do better against, y'know, proper shows.

HirogenGater
March 12th, 2006, 11:55 AM
I don't think so. Enough people still tune in to watch SG-1 and SGA primarily. I don't think it will be a big problem.

I agree, I don't think the ratings on SG1 or SGA will be hurt. I know I will miss seeing BSG on Friday night after SGA though

nano
March 12th, 2006, 04:53 PM
Dont know what the hell the writers where smoking when they wrote s02e20 but now they have a BIG PROBLEM...And thats why it was moved to Oct... At least thats my theory...

actdree
March 12th, 2006, 05:03 PM
I think they are hoping to spread their ratings out over the entire year, but truth of the matter is, I don't want to stay at home just to watch one episode of BSG and nothing else interesting. I got hooked on BSG because it was after SG-1 and Atlantis. My preference is that they would have left well enough alone.

angel29.01
July 17th, 2006, 05:47 AM
Hi, does anybody know the ratings of the season-opener last friday?
sorry for my bad english, I'm german...

ussrelativity
July 17th, 2006, 08:02 AM
The ratings are not in yet, as far as I know, but if you were to keep checking,

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/

At the bottom is the list of ratings for shows for a certain week. Soon, hopefully the week of the premieres will be up. I really hope that the shows get back into the 2 rating range.

The.Prior.of.The.Ori
July 17th, 2006, 10:07 AM
The ratings are not in yet, as far as I know, but if you were to keep checking,

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/

At the bottom is the list of ratings for shows for a certain week. Soon, hopefully the week of the premieres will be up. I really hope that the shows get back into the 2 rating range.
yes, lets hope so. it deserves no place but the top

the fifth man
July 17th, 2006, 08:27 PM
yes, lets hope so. it deserves no place but the top

You know, I couldn't agree more with that statement.:)

The.Prior.of.The.Ori
July 17th, 2006, 08:42 PM
:zelenka25:

ussrelativity
July 17th, 2006, 09:06 PM
:weiranime17:

Let's keep the season going extra strong.



Still, no info on ratings.

Farscapefan
July 18th, 2006, 12:18 AM
:weiranime17:

Let's keep the season going extra strong.



Still, no info on ratings.

I wouldn't expect them earlier than Friday or something like this. Fingers crossed they're high! :zelenka25:

The Engineer
July 18th, 2006, 07:00 AM
I've read somewhere that it takes 3 weeks after the episode was aired to find out what were the ratings for that particular episode.

Farscapefan
July 18th, 2006, 08:09 AM
I've read somewhere that it takes 3 weeks after the episode was aired to find out what were the ratings for that particular episode.

With syndicated show it's possible. I think we should know the ratings for Flesh and Blood episode around Friday.

the dancer of spaz
July 18th, 2006, 12:48 PM
I've read somewhere that it takes 3 weeks after the episode was aired to find out what were the ratings for that particular episode.

No. That may be how long Sci Fi waits to release them ;), but it typically takes them a couple of days at the least to figure it out. The Nielsen's ratings system is pretty fast.

glennh73
August 2nd, 2006, 06:16 PM
Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis didn't find any help in their early-season ratings struggles on July 28, as the third episode of each series dipped slightly in viewership.

After a lead-in airing of the off-network series Night Stalker earned a 1.1 average household rating, SG-1 brought in a 1.5 rating -- down one-tenth of a point from the previous week's episode. Though the series hasn't yet found its ratings spark in its record-setting tenth season, cross-over episode "The Pegasus Project" will go down in history as a fan favorite.

Stargate Atlantis rounded out SCI FI Channel's Friday night line-up at 10 p.m. Eastern/Pacific, with the premiere of "Irresistible." The episode held on to its lead-in audience for a 1.5 rating, also down one-tenth of a point from the week before.

Late-night reruns of the episodes earned ratings of 0.9 and

0.7, respectively -- even with the July 21 episodes



Well guys its over, the ratings sinking for probably the best episode of SG-1 in a long time. I hate to think it but i see both shows being canned this year.

To think Stargate is pretty much all i watch too.

I just dont get why people have tuned out, i mean they watched last season.

I just have this feeling we will never get the ending to the whole ORI plot.

And boy would that suck?

Agent_Dark
August 2nd, 2006, 06:33 PM
I just dont get why people of tuned out, i mean they watched last season.
Maybe it was the last season that convinced viewers that it wasnt worth watching anymore?

MediaSavant
August 2nd, 2006, 06:51 PM
Though 90% of the comments seem focused on SG-1 and its changes, the real disappointment is Atlantis. SG-1 wasn't supposed to last this long. Atlantis was supposed to carry on the torch the way Deep Space Nine did for Next Generation within the Trek franchise. But, after two seasons, the show hasn't fulfilled that goal. Whatever has mired SG-1's ratings is miring Atlantis even more because it's not supposed to be suffering from the same tiredness at its age. Many SF shows hit their ratings strides in Season 3--Babylon 5, Farscape, X-Files But Atlantis hasn't developed an independent audience or pulse of its own.

The whole franchise is in a funk. It appears to be yesterday's news.

siXbrownSnakes2
August 2nd, 2006, 07:07 PM
competition

no bsg

tivos

Jackie
August 2nd, 2006, 07:28 PM
couple of problems; sci fi moved the time slots and removed BSG from the line up. If Atlantis and SG-1 had thier old time slots followed by BSG I think the summer ratings would have been better.

Last year they had the perfect fri night line up and they went screwed with it.

If it's not broke don't fix it, sci-fi.

full.infinity
August 2nd, 2006, 07:29 PM
couple of problems; sci fi moved the time slots and removed BSG from the line up. If Atlantis and SG-1 had thier old time slots followed by BSG I think the summer ratings would have been better.

Last year they had the perfect fri night line up and they went screwed with it.

If it's not broke don't fix it, sci-fi.
That's BSG's fault.

earck
August 2nd, 2006, 07:49 PM
At the very least all of this seasons eps will be aired. Andromeda was getting comparable even a little worse ratings in its last season and SciFi played them all. The big question is season 11. As I understand it the contracts have been signed so season 11 is a go unless scifi cancels it.

earck
August 2nd, 2006, 07:51 PM
Also we won't see the effects of an episode until the next week. Last weeks episode was GREAT so it should generate higher rating NEXT week. Just because an episode is good it won't change that episode's rating.

earck
August 2nd, 2006, 07:53 PM
One more thing. I would be interested in seeing how all the other shows on all networks are doing. Maybe there is a huge ratings drop across the board, that would explain a few things.

MasySyma
August 2nd, 2006, 08:04 PM
What I don't understand is why the shows were moved back to their pre-BSG time slots? With BSG to premier in October, shouldn't their Season 2 reruns be on?

The shows are pulling ratings that match what they earned when in these times before, so while I'm concerned for the future of SG-1, (don't get me started on SGA), I want to know why the execs are messing with a good thing unless they are trying to find an excuse to kill a franchise that doesn't seem inclined to die anytime soon.

Hopefully, next week's ratings will improve.

Agent_Dark
August 2nd, 2006, 08:18 PM
couple of problems; sci fi moved the time slots and removed BSG from the line up. If Atlantis and SG-1 had thier old time slots followed by BSG I think the summer ratings would have been better.

Last year they had the perfect fri night line up and they went screwed with it.

If it's not broke don't fix it, sci-fi.


That's BSG's fault.
So SG1 and Atlantis only get good ratings if BSG follows them? Wouldn't that mean that Stargate isn't able to hold its own anymore without a heavy hitter shoring it up?

ToasterOnFire
August 2nd, 2006, 08:26 PM
So SG1 and Atlantis only get good ratings if BSG follows them? Wouldn't that mean that Stargate isn't able to hold its own anymore without a heavy hitter shoring it up?
And does that also imply that the ratings for SG1 and Atlantis have been higher in the past season or two thanks to BSG or, vice versa, would have been lower without it?

I'm all but convinced that the lower ratings this season are due to losing BSG as the anchor. Not much you can do about it now though. :S


ETA: Just curious - who would get the profits if they stuck Stargate eps on iTunes like BSG? SciFi? MGM/Sony? Both?

Gunslinger
August 2nd, 2006, 09:19 PM
Many SF shows hit their ratings strides in Season 3--Babylon 5, Farscape, X-Files

Actually Farscape went out with high ratings with the only reason given that episodes were "expensive" to produce. The show was getting better and better, the fans had no complaints, unlike Stargate lately, and new people were tuning in.

Upper SciFi management changed however and they were into more "realistic" shows. So in a choice between Stargate SG-1 and Farscape they chose Stargate. Can't really blame em, it was a very tough choice and I believe at the time Stargate might have had even higher ratings and cost less to produce.

Anyhow, SciFi managed to wiggle their way out of a 2 season contract that still had a season on it. Finito.

But Farscape didn't have low ratings before it was dropped, I can't speak for those other shows.

the fifth man
August 2nd, 2006, 09:20 PM
These ratings do definitely disappoint me. I just hope they somehow can rebound from this.

SG-25B11
August 2nd, 2006, 09:25 PM
In my opinion, Stargate SG-1 is returning to it's base audience. The number of viewers watching is going down, compared to recent seasons, because there were so many people watching during season eight. I expect both shows to be renewed again.

The average number of viewers for this season so far is 2 million. For season six it was 1.3 million and season seven was a little higher at 1.4 million. Then with season eight, the average nearly doubled rising to 2.7 million. Then last season, as I would have expected, the number was lower at 2.4 million.

These numbers from my point of view show that Stargate SG-1 is doing well in the ratings.

majorsal
August 2nd, 2006, 10:49 PM
Though 90% of the comments seem focused on SG-1 and its changes, the real disappointment is Atlantis. SG-1 wasn't supposed to last this long. Atlantis was supposed to carry on the torch the way Deep Space Nine did for Next Generation within the Trek franchise. But, after two seasons, the show hasn't fulfilled that goal. Whatever has mired SG-1's ratings is miring Atlantis even more because it's not supposed to be suffering from the same tiredness at its age. Many SF shows hit their ratings strides in Season 3--Babylon 5, Farscape, X-Files But Atlantis hasn't developed an independent audience or pulse of its own.

The whole franchise is in a funk. It appears to be yesterday's news.

same writers.





sally :sam:

Uber
August 2nd, 2006, 10:55 PM
Maybe it was the last season that convinced viewers that it wasnt worth watching anymore?That'd be my guess.

People tuned in to see the new direction of the new SG-1, how they integrated the new people/how they treated the veterans/what the new bad guys would be like/etc. and simply were not inclined to return.

Uber
August 2nd, 2006, 10:58 PM
Though 90% of the comments seem focused on SG-1 and its changes, the real disappointment is Atlantis. SG-1 wasn't supposed to last this long. Atlantis was supposed to carry on the torch the way Deep Space Nine did for Next Generation within the Trek franchise. But, after two seasons, the show hasn't fulfilled that goal. Whatever has mired SG-1's ratings is miring Atlantis even more because it's not supposed to be suffering from the same tiredness at its age. Many SF shows hit their ratings strides in Season 3--Babylon 5, Farscape, X-Files But Atlantis hasn't developed an independent audience or pulse of its own.

The whole franchise is in a funk. It appears to be yesterday's news.Then wouldn't the solution be to get better writers with fresh ideas that utilize all the characters well and tell compelling stories?

Avatar28
August 2nd, 2006, 11:12 PM
Ultiimately I think that as long as the series is still making a decent amount of money (which between first run on sci-fi, syndication, and DVDs I believe it still is) MGM will keep producing it. Granted, much of that depends on SciFi also renewing their first-run contract each year which in turns depends on the ratings.

Also correct me if I'm wrong but even with these lower numbers, it's still one of Sci-Fi's better rated shows is it not?

Lord Shiva
August 3rd, 2006, 12:09 AM
Then wouldn't the solution be to get better writers with fresh ideas that utilize all the characters well and tell compelling stories?


All the characters are utilized well... it's just a case of different strokes for different folks.

MediaSavant
August 3rd, 2006, 02:07 AM
Then wouldn't the solution be to get better writers with fresh ideas that utilize all the characters well and tell compelling stories?

They could try, but would it work? Let's take ER or Law & Order. Both shows have been on a long time. ER used to be the number one show on TV. It still gets decent enough ratings to get renewed, but there's probably nothing they can do that will ever make it #1 again once people got tired of it. They could have new writers, new stories, special guest stars, but it's just not going to happen. At the same time, the formula can't be messed with too much or the viewers they still do have will protest too much change.

Same with Law & Order. It also had better days ratings-wise. But, can they really fiddle with their formulas too much?

As I saw some people here get excited here about Morpheus a few weeks ago while on boards I visit that are more "casual viewers" thought it was boring.

MediaSavant
August 3rd, 2006, 02:12 AM
Ultiimately I think that as long as the series is still making a decent amount of money (which between first run on sci-fi, syndication, and DVDs I believe it still is) MGM will keep producing it. Granted, much of that depends on SciFi also renewing their first-run contract each year which in turns depends on the ratings.

Also correct me if I'm wrong but even with these lower numbers, it's still one of Sci-Fi's better rated shows is it not?

SciFi ratings down. Syndication ratings really down. SciFi reruns no longer pulling in high numbers, thus decreasing their value. DVD's probably not up--did it appear in Billboard's top sellers list the last time it was released?

And those observations apply to Atlantis as well as SG-1.

As for "better rated" shows, the shows are now #3 and #4 behind ECW and Eureka. Farscape was its #2 show when it was canceled.

keshou
August 3rd, 2006, 04:00 AM
SciFi ratings down. Syndication ratings really down. SciFi reruns no longer pulling in high numbers, thus decreasing their value. DVD's probably not up--did it appear in Billboard's top sellers list the last time it was released?

And those observations apply to Atlantis as well as SG-1.

As for "better rated" shows, the shows are now #3 and #4 behind ECW and Eureka. Farscape was its #2 show when it was canceled.
That's the trend I'm sensing....that the overall franchise just isn't a hot item anymore.

SG-1 kind of got a new lease on life when it moved from Showtime to Scifi. New viewers sampling the show for the first time - or at least that was my perception. The Monday night stacks played for several years with solid numbers as new viewers caught up on the show. Now the reruns on Mondays have been pulled off due to low ratings. And substituting Atlantis reruns didn't work either.

If SG-1 was faltering as Atlantis kept up the pace I'd think casual viewers just didn't like the changes on SG-1. Or I suppose it's possible SG-1 has been holding up Atlantis and if casual viewers didn't like the changes on SG-1...Atlantis suffers as well. Or maybe casual viewers are just tired of all things "Stargate". BSG may have helped hold up both shows last season.

I sure wouldn't bet on a S11 of SG-1 with these type of ratings. But SG-1 has been in its "last season" for years. I think they'll end SG-1 but leave room for a miniseries. In a year or so I think a well-advertised SG-1 miniseries could do pretty well.

The more interesting question is whether Atlantis will get renewed. I think they were counting on Atlantis for a couple more seasons at least. Martin Gero mentioned in that "pre-season" interview that S3 would be a "make or break" year for them.

Descent
August 3rd, 2006, 04:06 AM
Guys, theres a number of reasons for these ratings: 1. Tivos, its summer 2. Its summer, people aren't going to sit around at home a lot. 3. I do think BSG was helping SG-1 and SGA somewhat but to think they were totally dependant on it for ratings is just silly.

I have a feeling that ratings will climb up once summers done and over with.

Dutch_Razor
August 3rd, 2006, 04:15 AM
If SG1 and SGA are Sci-Fi's nr 3 and 4 shows wouldn't it be kinda stupid to cancel them?

As long as SG makes profit it would be logical to renew them...

ses110
August 3rd, 2006, 04:21 AM
The Show has always been on in the Summer and the Show should not need BSG to help with the ratings.The Show did fine without BSG before.

Descent
August 3rd, 2006, 04:21 AM
As long as SG makes profit it would be logical to renew them...

I think its a pretty safe bet they'll be renewed again. Its the summer and its not like the ratings are super terrible (like say below 1.0, yikes). The shows are doing decent right now, there will be a ratings climb.

KindlyKeller
August 3rd, 2006, 04:32 AM
The panic is very, very premature in my opinion. Even if these ratings held as is the whole year, I still think both shows would be renewed.

ReganX
August 3rd, 2006, 04:33 AM
Guys, theres a number of reasons for these ratings: 1. Tivos, its summer 2. Its summer, people aren't going to sit around at home a lot. 3. I do think BSG was helping SG-1 and SGA somewhat but to think they were totally dependant on it for ratings is just silly.

I have a feeling that ratings will climb up once summers done and over with.

Haven't previous seasons started around the same time of year? Season Eight's first three episodes scored a 2.4 for each of their first two episodes and Season Nine's first two scored a 2.1 each. I believe that each rating point was worth more those years than they are this year.

The summer cannot be blamed for low ratings, and if people who recorded episodes didn't count towards Nielsen ratings before, this cannot be blamed either.

I imagine that, if the show is to be renewed, a decision will have to be made in the very near future so that TPTB can get the ball rolling on Season Eleven or write the final episodes of Season Ten to wrap things up.

Descent
August 3rd, 2006, 04:41 AM
Alright you got a point (Season 7 premiered in June for crying out loud) but mine is still valid to a degree, summer does mean for less fans at home to watch so people resort to tivoing these days or downloading. :daniel23:

Skydiver
August 3rd, 2006, 04:46 AM
couple of problems; sci fi moved the time slots and removed BSG from the line up. If Atlantis and SG-1 had thier old time slots followed by BSG I think the summer ratings would have been better.

Last year they had the perfect fri night line up and they went screwed with it.

If it's not broke don't fix it, sci-fi.
i agree. with the 3 shows, they had a juggernaut - or as much of one as scifi will ever have

but in thier greed to 'own' 40 weeks of the year, they've doomed all 3 shows.

I think when they get around to premiering BSG this fall its ratings will be lack luster as well

if you want to win the night, you need to offer a whole night's programming, not just bits and pieces.

it'll just give them more excuses but basically scifi has medled tehir shows into a funk.

I do think that the schedule isn't the ONLY factor. there is also a distinct lack of quality, a very real lack of interest and yeah, writers that are so bored and burnt out that they're rolling out fanfic 'quality' scripts and passing them off as fantastic stuff.

breaking up the alt/sg1/bsg lineup is only one element, but it is an element that will hurt all 3 shows

ReganX
August 3rd, 2006, 04:51 AM
Alright you got a point (Season 7 premiered in June for crying out loud) but mine is still valid to a degree, summer does mean for less fans at home to watch so people resort to tivoing these days or downloading. :daniel23:

Perhaps, but balanced against the fact that the beginning of a season is, along with the end, usually a high point for ratings, it does not bode well. "Avalon, Parts 1 and 2" were the highest scoring episodes of Season Nine. "A New Order, Parts 1 and 2" tied with the Season Eight finale for highest ratings of the season.

It was still summer when they were first aired and people were still able to record episodes.

If the 1.4 and 1.6 ratings reports for the first two episodes of Season Ten are true, together with the rating point value of 1,250,000 then the first two episodes did worse than the lowest scoring episode of Season Nine.

TPTB and Sci-Fi won't be able to wait long before making a decision whether or not to continue SG-1, so it's probably down to the ratings for the episodes already shown and perhaps the next few whether or not the show is renewed. They won't have the time to wait and see if the ratings get better towards the end of the season.

ShardsofGlass
August 3rd, 2006, 04:59 AM
The panic is very, very premature in my opinion. Even if these ratings held as is the whole year, I still think both shows would be renewed.

EXCEPT for the fact that the writers have to write the last episodes of the season. At least for SG-1, they've said that they haven't finished writing the last eps because they want to know if there's going to be a Season 11 or not. At some point, Scifi will have to decide or the writers will just have to write it like it's a series-ending finale rather than a season-ending finale.

Ltcolshepjumper
August 3rd, 2006, 05:03 AM
another problem is that they reallly need to come up with new ideas for both shows, not slightly different repeated ideas. And they should think about purely evil enemies whose only goal is domination. The false god/ predatory humanoid insect ideas are very, very old. The evil robot ideas are also old. Why can't they come up with something new? Stargate has the rare oppurtunity to continually change the show's direction due to the fact that the Stargate network is largely unexplored in the show. Atlantis has disappointed me in the fact that , unlike SG-1, they have many primitive, pre-technological races, a few industrial races, but no technologically advanced races that have nothing to do with the Ancients or the Wraith. SG-1 was a lot more diverse for many years, but I don't know how many new ideas TPTB can come out with. It can't continue for another 5 years, sad as it is. I really hope Atlantis continues at least for another 3 years. It has a lot of potential.:sheppard:

kazzyk
August 3rd, 2006, 05:27 AM
Maybe it was the last season that convinced viewers that it wasnt worth watching anymore?

I agree. People just didnt come back this year.
The rating of 1.5 actually includes DVR. Live +DVR in an attempt to take in account those that tape.
Which means the live rating was a tad lower.

I suppose there are all kinds of things folks can blame this on but IMO---the formula that made SG what it was is now gone and the "new" has not been accepted by a good number of people.

I see Sci-Fi already backing off SG and once they get that coveted 200 number I feel we will see further distance.

Maybe the writers are tired or bored like Sky said--the scripts certainly do not seem to have the well thought out stories we watched for 8 yrs.
Who knows--personally--I think its over and TPTB already know it.

There is good news--I think the franchise will continue in some fashion IE: movies, specials etc....

Ltcolshepjumper
August 3rd, 2006, 05:31 AM
I agree. People just didnt come back this year.
The rating of 1.5 actually includes DVR. Live +DVR in an attempt to take in account those that tape.
Which means the live rating was a tad lower.

I suppose there are all kinds of things folks can blame this on but IMO---the formula that made SG what it was is now gone and the "new" has not been accepted by a good number of people.

I see Sci-Fi already backing off SG and once they get that coveted 200 number I feel we will see further distance.

Maybe the writers are tired or bored like Sky said--the scripts certainly do not seem to have the well thought out stories we watched for 8 yrs.
Who knows--personally--I think its over and TPTB already know it.

There is good news--I think the franchise will continue in some fashion IE: movies, specials etc....

7 years. Season 8 wasn't that much of an improvement but that's just me.:sheppard:

GateMan2000
August 3rd, 2006, 05:39 AM
If this is the last season of SG1...they will do some sort of mini series to tie up the Ori story.

ReganX
August 3rd, 2006, 05:42 AM
If this is the last season of SG1...they will do some sort of mini series to tie up the Ori story.

It depends. TPTB and Sci-Fi may not want to leave the Ori story open. It's possible that we might see a miraculous victory over the Ori in the last episode and that any miniseries - they may or may not make one, so I don't see them wanting to leave the show on a cliffhanger - would deal with another villain.

Nefreyu
August 3rd, 2006, 05:52 AM
wow 1.5 for the best episode in years thats just crazy.

ReganX
August 3rd, 2006, 05:53 AM
wow 1.5 for the best episode in years thats just crazy.

Which episode are you referring to?

LaCroix
August 3rd, 2006, 06:29 AM
And does that also imply that the ratings for SG1 and Atlantis have been higher in the past season or two thanks to BSG or, vice versa, would have been lower without it?

I'm all but convinced that the lower ratings this season are due to losing BSG as the anchor. Not much you can do about it now though. :S


ETA: Just curious - who would get the profits if they stuck Stargate eps on iTunes like BSG? SciFi? MGM/Sony? Both?


Sony/MGM would be the one to share the profits, since they own it. But I don't see that iTunes in Sg-1/Atl. future, MGM has a deal with Fox to distribute DVD's and MGM wants that all alone.

Serebii
August 3rd, 2006, 06:34 AM
Ratings such as these aren't fair assesments. Nielsen Ratings and boxes are completely stupid...they should determine a proper way to asses it before becoming doomsayers

Skydiver
August 3rd, 2006, 06:48 AM
guys

let's remember please that this thread is to discuss the RATINGS, not the show itself.

Yes, i know that some comparison is inevitable, but this thread should not descend into a lengthy 'this is why it sucks' thread.

MediaSavant
August 3rd, 2006, 07:38 AM
if people who recorded episodes didn't count towards Nielsen ratings before, this cannot be blamed either.

FYI--VCR recording has always counted toward ratings and is still does. What has changed is how DVR's are counted. Due to technological advances in metering technology, more detail is possible and playback behavior is counted, not just recording. Hence, a different way to show the ratings has arrived. Technology giveth and technology taketh away.

The number of DVR owners does not even approach the number of VCR owners yet.

Skydiver
August 3rd, 2006, 09:10 AM
The ratings also don't and can ever take into account folks like me, I dont' have digital cable. My dvr records off air (and it's really a dvd recorder anyway)

and i'm in the midwest, and a vast majority of our people do not live in large metropolis'. nor do they have cable (some do fit in because they have teh mini dishes)

my point is that there's huge chunks of the population that are ignored because the measuring technology isn't available

and i'm not even gonna start on teh Big Brother potential for spying on people with said technology. Every little bit of this tech just chips away at an individual's privacy

Chricton
August 3rd, 2006, 09:23 AM
Another reason why ratings are down that I have not seen discussed here is that Scifi, in many locations, has gone from Basic cable to Premium. Chicago's Comcast provider made the genious decision of putting Scifi with the premium package, as of August 22nd, 2005. This might also account for why ratings of part 2 of that season were lower.

It makes the reason for BOTH shows (BSG, too) ratings lower make a little more sense, rather than the amusing "the writing is bad" theory.

I'm also hearing now that more areas are doing this?

And as for SG-1 and SG-A being the number 3 & 4 shows, cancelling them might be stupid from that point of view, but remember that Farscape was cancelled when it was their #2, behind SG-1. Invisible Man was cancelled when it was their #2, and Lexx was killed when it was their #3. First Wave was cancelled at #3 also.

The station might be thinking that a just a couple extra tenths of a rating point not be worth the million of extra dollars. BSG would be spared this fate to a dregree because of it's "acclaim". The one thing almost more salivating to a station than a Nielson point is to have TV Guide rave about one of your shows every night of every week. Farscape was cancelled when it was only achieving numbers of 1.0! Had the show not been a critics favorite, Scifi would have been far less lenient. Sadly the Stargates don't get this type of recognition.

But either way, all this doomsday talk happened at the end of season nine and two as well. A couple different topics on the 1.6/1.5 ratings both shows started experiencing near the end. Scifi still renewed. Too be honest, sometimes you guys get a little too naysay. :S

Sure there's more reason now more than ever to be that way, but lighten up. ;) Try enjoying the show while it's on. I have been since season five ended.

the fifth man
August 3rd, 2006, 10:43 AM
and i'm not even gonna start on teh Big Brother potential for spying on people with said technology. Every little bit of this tech just chips away at an individual's privacy

I don't see it that way at all. I wouldn't mind networks being able to track what I watch. Who cares? At least if they could track accurately what people are or aren't watching, good shows wouldn't get axed so darn much. I don't like the future of programs I enjoy coming down to if someone with a stupid box in their home decided to watch or not watch it. I want my viewing to count.

Chricton
August 3rd, 2006, 10:55 AM
I don't see how knowing what your watching harms your privacy. There's not watching you shower :/

Your internet provider (cable, at least) tracks what sites you visit, so...

the fifth man
August 3rd, 2006, 11:00 AM
I don't see how knowing what your watching harms your privacy. There's not watching you shower :/

Your internet provider (cable, at least) tracks what sites you visit, so...

Yeah, I wouldn't see it as a privacy issue. If people are concerned, they should make it voluntary then. I know I'd sign up for it.

GhostPoet
August 3rd, 2006, 11:08 AM
Another reason why ratings are down that I have not seen discussed here is that Scifi, in many locations, has gone from Basic cable to Premium. Chicago's Comcast provider made the genious decision of putting Scifi with the premium package, as of August 22nd, 2005. This might also account for why ratings of part 2 of that season were lower.

It makes the reason for BOTH shows (BSG, too) ratings lower make a little more sense, rather than the amusing "the writing is bad" theory.

I'm also hearing now that more areas are doing this?

And as for SG-1 and SG-A being the number 3 & 4 shows, cancelling them might be stupid from that point of view, but remember that Farscape was cancelled when it was their #2, behind SG-1. Invisible Man was cancelled when it was their #2, and Lexx was killed when it was their #3. First Wave was cancelled at #3 also.

The station might be thinking that a just a couple extra tenths of a rating point not be worth the million of extra dollars. BSG would be spared this fate to a dregree because of it's "acclaim". The one thing almost more salivating to a station than a Nielson point is to have TV Guide rave about one of your shows every night of every week. Farscape was cancelled when it was only achieving numbers of 1.0! Had the show not been a critics favorite, Scifi would have been far less lenient. Sadly the Stargates don't get this type of recognition.

But either way, all this doomsday talk happened at the end of season nine and two as well. A couple different topics on the 1.6/1.5 ratings both shows started experiencing near the end. Scifi still renewed. Too be honest, sometimes you guys get a little too naysay. :S

Sure there's more reason now more than ever to be that way, but lighten up. ;) Try enjoying the show while it's on. I have been since season five ended.


I think you're on to something there...when Sci-Fi switched to the upper packages, I know a lot of people who couldn't afford to upgrade...therefore forcing them to download the episodes...

LaCroix
August 3rd, 2006, 11:16 AM
Sorry, but I have to agree with Skydiver.


Originally Posted by Skydiver
and i'm not even gonna start on teh Big Brother potential for spying on people with said technology. Every little bit of this tech just chips away at an individual's privacy

I know I wouldn't have posted this, let alone join this forum if I had to use my
real name (Sorry Darren :S ). So I hide behind my avatar. (No not the pic. that I use, but my user name LaCroix)

But on topic. This new rating must be worriesome to TPTB on both shows.

Jonzey
August 3rd, 2006, 11:25 AM
and i'm not even gonna start on teh Big Brother potential for spying on people with said technology. Every little bit of this tech just chips away at an individual's privacy
It's hardly spying. I'd imagine it's all digitised- what each household is watching is recorded and then the stats are spat out of a machine- it's not like one guy sitting in an office going through it all saying ''Ah, this guy, who lives at this address, was watching porn on TV at 3 in the morning!''

I doubt they even link the viewers to a name and address when calculating the ratings.

Kanten
August 3rd, 2006, 11:35 AM
On a slightly unrelated note, is it just me, or has advertising for Stargate become almost completely nonexistant this year? I admit I don't watch Sci Fi during the week as much as I used to, but I think I have yet to see one commercial for an upcoming episode outside of the usual one during the closing credits. Between this, splitting the winning Friday lineup from the last two years, and that ridiculous hiatus announcement, I really do think SciFi is intentionally trying to kill it.

God_of_the_Sun
August 3rd, 2006, 11:50 AM
The ratings definatly seem lack luster but i suspect that a decision will not be made regarding the fates of SG-1 or Atlantis until February - once Battlestar Galactica has returned and the shows have resettled for the second half of their respective seasons. If BsG has also shown a ratings dip, or indeed SG1 and Atlantis show ratings growth alongside Battlestar, they might renew them.

If Battlstar is as strong as ever AND Stargates ratings are still down than they might well be sunk.
It all depends too on how much stock MGM places on the (potential) movie franchise revival and DVD sales. If the shows are still turning in a profit it shouldn't matter to them that ratings are down.

MediaSavant
August 3rd, 2006, 11:50 AM
On a slightly unrelated note, is it just me, or has advertising for Stargate become almost completely nonexistant this year?

I don't watch much of the network, but there were ads in Eureka this week.

I wouldn't be surprised if on-air promotion was a little less, but not because of any intentional snubbing. There's only so much promo time and they've had a lot of new shows to promote with it. The ad time seems more dispersed over different shows.

MediaSavant
August 3rd, 2006, 11:56 AM
Another reason why ratings are down that I have not seen discussed here is that Scifi, in many locations, has gone from Basic cable to Premium. Chicago's Comcast provider made the genious decision of putting Scifi with the premium package, as of August 22nd, 2005. This might also account for why ratings of part 2 of that season were lower.

Nope. The ratings we see are called "coverage area ratings". They represent a percentage of the households that receive Sci-Fi not a percentage of the entire country. The numerator is the number of households watching the show. The denominator is the number who receive the network. If households no longer receive the network they get taken out of both the numerator and the denominator.

LaCroix
August 3rd, 2006, 12:00 PM
I believe that there was ads. running on 6/17/06 during the Dr. Who marathon
with AT, CJ, and JF "playing" their roles during a 60 second spots this day.

So there was some advanced ads. almost a month before season 10 began.

MediaSavant
August 3rd, 2006, 12:02 PM
The ratings also don't and can ever take into account folks like me, I dont' have digital cable. My dvr records off air (and it's really a dvd recorder anyway)

and i'm in the midwest, and a vast majority of our people do not live in large metropolis'. nor do they have cable (some do fit in because they have teh mini dishes)

my point is that there's huge chunks of the population that are ignored because the measuring technology isn't available


This is a misconception. The Nielsen sample is designed to represent all parts of the country and be geographically and demographically balanced. Rural or Urban. Young or old. No cable or digital cable. Midwest or East Coast.

As I said in a previous post, the ratings we get are not the "Total U.S." ratings, but a measure of the ratings within the universe of households that has cable or satellite and can receive SciFi. If they were shown as a percentage of all households--and they could be--they'd be even lower than they seem.

Albion
August 3rd, 2006, 12:42 PM
Upper SciFi management changed however and they were into more "realistic" shows. So in a choice between Stargate SG-1 and Farscape they chose Stargate.

How ironic that they then went on to reduce SG1 to the same kind of parody/ cartoon/comedy episodes that Farscape produced. And by that I don't mean to disparage Farscape - I enjoyed watching that show, too. But that kind of theme/tone suited Farscape and was what made it enjoyable. It just looks incongruous on SG1 - a show which, until S9, prided itself on its 'realistic' miltary basis for plots and characterisations.

Albion :)

Descent
August 3rd, 2006, 12:49 PM
Okay, Farscape WAS renewed for a 5th season but the company who was going to fund that season backed out at the last second so the renewal fell through. So all this talk about how Farscape was #2 and still didn't get renewed is wrong.

Erik Pasternak
August 3rd, 2006, 12:54 PM
The ratings definatly seem lack luster but i suspect that a decision will not be made regarding the fates of SG-1 or Atlantis until February - once Battlestar Galactica has returned and the shows have resettled for the second half of their respective seasons.That'd be hard--the shows usually begin filming for the next season in February, with script work beginning even before then. Usually, the decision is made sometime in November/December, IIRC.

ShardsofGlass
August 3rd, 2006, 12:59 PM
How ironic that they then went on to reduce SG1 to the same kind of parody/ cartoon/comedy episodes that Farscape produced. And by that I don't mean to disparage Farscape - I enjoyed watching that show, too. But that kind of theme/tone suited Farscape and was what made it enjoyable. It just looks incongruous on SG1 - a show which, until S9, prided itself on its 'realistic' miltary basis for plots and characterisations.

Albion :)

I have yet to see something on SG that is remotely close to an episode of FS. A comedy on SG is completely different in tone and everything else than a comedy on Farscape.

Descent
August 3rd, 2006, 01:02 PM
That'd be hard--the shows usually begin filming for the next season in February, with script work beginning even before then. Usually, the decision is made sometime in November/December, IIRC.

They film from February to October, meaning the finales are written in late September.

oragans
August 3rd, 2006, 01:56 PM
any true farscape fan should know stargate it not in anyway like stargate.
And if they do get picked up i imagine they will start shooting at a different due to the second half of the season may or may not be showing in march.

The Ori
August 3rd, 2006, 03:24 PM
Dissapointing that the ratings are so low!!

Zeppan
August 3rd, 2006, 04:29 PM
I agree with some of u that this end-of-the-world talk of SG1 and SGA is a bit rushed...

First of all I agree with someone(dont remember who posted it) that Summer definitely has something to do with it.... No matter if u watch previous years... There's been the world cup, an intensely hot summer and vacations are just about to end...Im pretty sure more people will bench themselves infront every friday night, after a long week of school/work

Furthermore i myself didnt really think episode one was that good.. I think a big problem so far is that they are leaving us with allot more agony of waiting for the thing we all are waiting for..and the action so far in this season has been pretty low...

Im pretty sure ratings will go up tomorrow since the TPP episode pretty much rocked!

And to further improve on the ratings we have been promised the Furlings will finally appear, and also richard dean andersson will be coming back a few eps... Those 2 things if PLAYED OUT CORRECTLY by the writers will certainly give the ratings a boost!

I myself still think SG1 and SGA can back eachother up pretty good, and i feel very sorry for BSG who now has to carry a few month of fridays on its own... Will probably be really tough for its ratings...Hopefully they get the sister show(about pre BSG time) up and running soon enuff

edain
August 3rd, 2006, 05:09 PM
I think having Nightstalker at eight kills the shows. It's a pain to wait another hour for a tv show while being forced to watch something that got dropped after six episodes. As an average I would have assumed the rest of the shows that night would be like this and would have watch Smackdown! or something else

Kanten
August 3rd, 2006, 05:09 PM
I'm going to hang back and watch a bit before really getting concerned. Hopefully the starting fall and TPP will help recover the rating a bit. If 200 gets these low ratings, then I'm going to be worried.

Giantevilhead
August 3rd, 2006, 06:42 PM
The show has changed too much. There was a lot more mystery in the beginning of the series. We didn't know much about the Goa'uld or the rest of the galaxy. The Goa'uld threat built up gradually over time. The System Lords didn't consider earth a threat until season 3. Apophis didn't invade earth until the end of season 1. A lot of time was devoted to the development of the Goa'uld. With the Ori, we knew from the beginning who they were and what they want and they began their invasion by the second episode. The whole Ori storyline seems way too rushed. With the Goa'uld, every single Goa'uld was unique. They each had their own strengths and weaknesses, and they each had their own personalities. Every Goa'uld was special or memorable in some way. With the Ori, all the Priors are the same, there's nothing special or memorable about them. The Ori may be far more powerful than the Goa'uld but they're certainly not as interesting. Another thing is that in the earlier seasons, around half the episodes were stand alone episodes that had nothing to do with ongoing storylines. In season 9, most episodes were part of some continuing plot.

Mitchell82
August 3rd, 2006, 07:07 PM
I agree with some of u that this end-of-the-world talk of SG1 and SGA is a bit rushed...

First of all I agree with someone(dont remember who posted it) that Summer definitely has something to do with it.... No matter if u watch previous years... There's been the world cup, an intensely hot summer and vacations are just about to end...Im pretty sure more people will bench themselves infront every friday night, after a long week of school/work

Furthermore i myself didnt really think episode one was that good.. I think a big problem so far is that they are leaving us with allot more agony of waiting for the thing we all are waiting for..and the action so far in this season has been pretty low...

Im pretty sure ratings will go up tomorrow since the TPP episode pretty much rocked!

And to further improve on the ratings we have been promised the Furlings will finally appear, and also richard dean andersson will be coming back a few eps... Those 2 things if PLAYED OUT CORRECTLY by the writers will certainly give the ratings a boost!

I myself still think SG1 and SGA can back eachother up pretty good, and i feel very sorry for BSG who now has to carry a few month of fridays on its own... Will probably be really tough for its ratings...Hopefully they get the sister show(about pre BSG time) up and running soon enuff
I have stated in other threads that while I am concerned about the ratings I will remain optimistic about a new season. I have been a fan from the very begining and have liked all the numerous changes over time. I am loving the new direction. I loved season 9 and am loving this year aswell. I can't wait till tommorow and I will stay hopefull that we will get a new season. I believe the ratings will improve and I hope they are good enough for SKIFFY to allow at least one more year.

freyr's mother
August 3rd, 2006, 07:12 PM
Don't worry about the ratings now. Just wait about 2 episodes until jack is back. Then the ratings will climb back up. Then when he appears in the atlantis eps, it'll bring the ratings back up for atlantis too.

gatephysics102
August 3rd, 2006, 07:24 PM
Maybe it was the last season that convinced viewers that it wasnt worth watching anymore?There's definitely something to that. If Season 9 had hooked viewers, they'd be here for Season 10. Scifi buffs are often extremely loyal (and often obsessive). For Stargate's ratings to drop when there are so few other big scifi series for competitions - and especially with the absence of any Star Trek series competition... Yes, there's definitely something to be said about Season 9 not creating enough interest in viewers - not enough to make them tune in for Season 10.

Season 8 was a resounding ratings success. And that pulled in viewers for Season 9... but then the ratings have dropped off.

Somethings not working.

Will they fix it? Or wait and watch and see if they can find enough of an audience to keep the series going on it's 'New Direction'?

gatephysics102
August 3rd, 2006, 07:33 PM
Though 90% of the comments seem focused on SG-1 and its changes, the real disappointment is Atlantis. SG-1 wasn't supposed to last this long. Atlantis was supposed to carry on the torch the way Deep Space Nine did for Next Generation within the Trek franchise. But, after two seasons, the show hasn't fulfilled that goal. Whatever has mired SG-1's ratings is miring Atlantis even more because it's not supposed to be suffering from the same tiredness at its age. Many SF shows hit their ratings strides in Season 3--Babylon 5, Farscape, X-Files But Atlantis hasn't developed an independent audience or pulse of its own.

The whole franchise is in a funk. It appears to be yesterday's news. I disagree that the franchise is yesterday's news. Quite the opposite, in fact. There has been almost a media blitz of Stargate advertising and articles and such. Every one and their uncle seems to be happy to be touting Stargate now-a-days. It's all over the front cover of TV Guide - several times in the past couple of years. There are articles and headlines touting the longest running scifi show, the new actors, the New Direction, etc. It's as if Stargate was the little poo-poo'd scifi show that has surprised all of the media - and now the media is more than willing to tout the show just because it has survived. And tout away they did - about the 200th episode, about the new characters, the new actors, the inclusion of the Farscape headliners, the return of RDA. Awards have been handed out to the show and the cast - and that made news and headlines again. Frankly, Stargate has been so 'all over the news media' that I've been astounded.

After all of that touting, however, the ratings have suddenly dropped.

So, what's the cause?

The plain facts are that Stargate is not pulling viewers away from other things they'd rather be doing. Stargate isn't enough of an incentive.

The talk about the rating systems... sigh... all shows who do poorly cry foul about the same things. All shows are subjected to the same ratings systems... so, folks who TIVO, or video tape Psych or Monk would also be convinced that their ratings would be even higher if the ratings system were adjusted to account for them. And Psych and Monk are currently direct time-slot competition for SG-1 and Atlantis.

The root cause of the low ratings is that Stargate isn't presently good enough to pull in enough viewers to rival the ratings that they got in Season 8.

astrogeologist
August 3rd, 2006, 08:59 PM
RE ratings:

So with all of the talk about Season 10's ratings and what it could mean for the end of the series... some folks have been comparing the ratings and such to Farscape's ratings when it was cancelled. Being clueless regarding Farscape's history, or it's ratings, I did a search and found this, for anyone who is interested Farscape cancellation (http://www.muppetcentral.com/news/2002/091802.shtml). I couldn't help but note the similarities between what Farscape experienced and what the Farscape fans were crying, and what seems to be happening for Stargate now.

Descent
August 3rd, 2006, 09:04 PM
Okay, Farscape WAS renewed for a 5th season but the company who was going to fund that season backed out at the last second so the renewal fell through. So all this talk about how Farscape was #2 and still didn't get renewed is wrong.

I don't think I need to repeat myself, I was/am a big Farscape fan so I know a lot about what happened. I particularly remember "Bad Timing" getting good ratings too, maybe im just getting old though. :P *sighs*

Mitchell82
August 3rd, 2006, 09:48 PM
There's definitely something to that. If Season 9 had hooked viewers, they'd be here for Season 10. Scifi buffs are often extremely loyal (and often obsessive). For Stargate's ratings to drop when there are so few other big scifi series for competitions - and especially with the absence of any Star Trek series competition... Yes, there's definitely something to be said about Season 9 not creating enough interest in viewers - not enough to make them tune in for Season 10.

Season 8 was a resounding ratings success. And that pulled in viewers for Season 9... but then the ratings have dropped off.

Somethings not working.

Will they fix it? Or wait and watch and see if they can find enough of an audience to keep the series going on it's 'New Direction'?
I agree that season 9 did upset some fans but not most. Infact most fans If I remember correctly really enjoyed season 9 and the changes once they gave it a chance. I don't think the fact that mabey 10-15 % of the fan base not likeing the changes is what has dropped the ratings. I've said before and I'll say it again. The schedual change and the fact it's up against new shows and the pulling of BSG has hurt SCi-Fi Friday. Howwever i think it's too early to "doom" Stargate. I think the ratings will clime enough to keep it on the air.

SGFerrit
August 4th, 2006, 12:18 AM
I highly doubt they will cancel both shows, they can't survive on BSG alone, and I doubt Eureka's success will last forever, I think their great ratings were down to the fact that sci fi was shouting it from the rooftops while totally forgetting about the series that practically made the channel

Mitchell82
August 4th, 2006, 12:23 AM
I highly doubt they will cancel both shows, they can't survive on BSG alone, and I doubt Eureka's success will last forever, I think their great ratings were down to the fact that sci fi was shouting it from the rooftops while totally forgetting about the series that practically made the channel
Of course they were. Eureka is Sci-Fis new baby so they completly forgot about it till they saw the ratings and were like "Oops we bad we stupid we make a booboo. We must fix but how?":cameron:

Osiris
August 4th, 2006, 02:21 AM
People keeps comparing Farscape and Stargate ratings but...

Farscape was averaging 1.2 in its last and fourth season while Stargate is around 1.5/1.6. Plus the ratings represent more viewers now than in 2002.

Stargate Sg-1 has done well considering it stayed 5 seasons on SciFI while very other original series never lasted longer than 4 season. The show was #1during 3 years and helped the channel a lot.

Anyway, I doubt they'll drop the franchise since they need original programming. Sg-1 may end this year, but I think Atlantis will at least go one more season. SciFi channel can't stick with BSG and Eureka. BSG's ratings were very similar to Atlantis' ones last season and I'm not sure airing the episodes in september will help the show. They should have sticked with the SciFi Friday line up. It was working well.

Jonzey
August 4th, 2006, 02:25 AM
The root cause of the low ratings is that Stargate isn't presently good enough to pull in enough viewers to rival the ratings that they got in Season 8.
And Atlantis?

This is not just an SG-1 problem! Why do people keep saying that, just so they can blame the writing or the quality?

B O Y S C O U T
August 4th, 2006, 02:32 AM
Simply put, it is Sci Fi's fault. SG1's early season ratings drops are due to programming and advertising. It's not that the quality of the show has declined it's the way sci fi is airing the show.

SGFerrit
August 4th, 2006, 03:45 AM
I figured out the season is so far doing better than seasons 1-7 so far, so if this weeks episode gets better ratings it should be OK hopefully:)

Descent
August 4th, 2006, 03:48 AM
The Neilson ratings have changed a bit since those seasons...and Seasons 1-5 aired on Showtime so those ratings don't apply here. Point is people need to stop worrying, start watching.

kazzyk
August 4th, 2006, 04:17 AM
On a slightly unrelated note, is it just me, or has advertising for Stargate become almost completely nonexistant this year? I admit I don't watch Sci Fi during the week as much as I used to, but I think I have yet to see one commercial for an upcoming episode outside of the usual one during the closing credits. Between this, splitting the winning Friday lineup from the last two years, and that ridiculous hiatus announcement, I really do think SciFi is intentionally trying to kill it.

I agree--due to poor ratings that actually began during the second half of S9 it does appear that Sci-Fi is backing away from SG.

Someone said most people liked S9 but is simply to general and the ratings do not support this.

"I have yet to see something on SG that is remotely close to an episode of FS."

Crichton!

Gwin
August 4th, 2006, 04:36 AM
"I have yet to see something on SG that is remotely close to an episode of FS."

Crichton!
Fortunately not ;)

Kalin
August 4th, 2006, 06:14 AM
Ratings wise, i think the real problem is the different countries.

I know the United States has the episodes playing now but those of us in Canada won't get them till November and I have no idea if people in other countrys are getting them now either, so we have no way of getting the true ratings of the episodes because alot of people won't be able to see them for a few more months,

MediaSavant
August 4th, 2006, 06:23 AM
Point is people need to stop worrying, start watching.

Worrying is good if it inspires somebody to do something...or even be prepared.

Farscape fans raised money to run their own ads instead of relying on SciFi to do it. But, that was done after the cancellation already happened and the "last ditch" hope was that the ratings for the remaining episodes would go up enough to make a difference.

I think if you asked any one of them if they would have preferred to have some warning and done something before the cancellation and not afterward, they would have screamed "hell, yeah".

ussrelativity
August 4th, 2006, 06:24 AM
This time around, I will get to see the episodes!!!

Gwin
August 4th, 2006, 06:56 AM
Ratings wise, i think the real problem is the different countries.

I know the United States has the episodes playing now but those of us in Canada won't get them till November and I have no idea if people in other countrys are getting them now either, so we have no way of getting the true ratings of the episodes because alot of people won't be able to see them for a few more months,
There is another problem, not every country shows them in original language. Here all series are dubed and I hate the fact that they do such a poor job and mainly a good job when it comes to movies. :S
Beside the fact that I can't stand the german voices of the characters of Stargate (both SG-1 and Atlantis).

full.infinity
August 4th, 2006, 07:36 AM
So SG1 and Atlantis only get good ratings if BSG follows them? Wouldn't that mean that Stargate isn't able to hold its own anymore without a heavy hitter shoring it up?
No, I'm saying that SG not being with BSG is BSG's fault.

MediaSavant
August 4th, 2006, 07:50 AM
Ratings wise, i think the real problem is the different countries.

I know the United States has the episodes playing now but those of us in Canada won't get them till November and I have no idea if people in other countrys are getting them now either, so we have no way of getting the true ratings of the episodes because alot of people won't be able to see them for a few more months,

Every country has its own ratings system and those ratings matter to whether those countries are interested in renewing their license for the show.

Vyse
August 4th, 2006, 08:24 AM
OK, I took Mass Communications in College last Fall and we studied the Nielsen ratings alot. In fact, I won an extra credit contest for picking the top watched shows in the Nielsens (I had CSI, Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, and Survivor, needless to say CSI was always #1 when new episodes aired). Unless you are a Nielsen family you don't affect the ratings. The Tivo excuse is just something the networks mae up. In fact the Nielsens also count the Tivo recordings, and sometimes show the Tivo chart seperately. I check the Nielsens (http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/nielsen.htm) every week since the class and haven't seen Stargate in the top 20 cable shows once. In fact Sci-Fi is not there almost all the time.

Now I don't think the Nielsens are that accuarate anymore. Back in the day when all you had was CBS, ABC, and NBC it was but not anymore with 100's of channels. So Stargate's ratings in reality could be higher or lower significantly.

I think there is a very good chance that SG-1 will be cancelled, but I'll be surprised if Atlantis is. I imagine they will want to give that show a little more time to find itself.

Also, it doesn't matter that much if a show is the network's #1 or #2, etc.. . What matters most is the cost/profit ratio. Show A might get better ratings then Show B, but if Show B costs alot less to make, the network makes more money off that show. Especially if there isn't a huge difference in the ratings.

TPTB have started laying the groundwork for cancelling SG-1 anyway. First, they whine and whine about rising development costs. Second, we heard talk about a third series. Third, We are now hearing stuff about the original movie trilogy starting up again. I won't be surprised if they cancel SG-1 after this season. The franchise now has bragging rights to the longest running US Sci-Fi show, so TPTB at Sci-Fi are probably happy with that right now.

Vyse
August 4th, 2006, 08:26 AM
I figured out the season is so far doing better than seasons 1-7 so far, so if this weeks episode gets better ratings it should be OK hopefully:)


No it isn't.

gategeologist2
August 4th, 2006, 11:04 AM
I figured out the season is so far doing better than seasons 1-7 so far, so if this weeks episode gets better ratings it should be OK hopefully http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/accesspics/seasonratingsbyepisode.gif

Vyse
August 4th, 2006, 11:15 AM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/accesspics/seasonratingsbyepisode.gif

Wow, great chart! Gives Green!

gategeologist2
August 4th, 2006, 12:18 PM
RE Ratings

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/accesspics/seasonratingsbyepisode.gifAnd here's another look at the data
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/accesspics/Seasonratingsallinoneline.gif

Descent
August 4th, 2006, 12:32 PM
Hmm, interesting. Season 9 might've suffered a drop in ratings compared to the last seasons but it still hasn't hit the all time low that Season 7 apparently suffered. :P I'm guessing that low was "Enemy Mine" right?

Jonzey
August 4th, 2006, 12:48 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/accesspics/seasonratingsbyepisode.gif
Problem with that is the ratings are not constant. A few years ago getting a 1.5 rating meant a certain number of viewers, but now a 1.5 rating corresponds to a different number of viewers. I don't know much about it, but I know the ratings and the number of viewers are two different things when comparing different seasons.

Descent
August 4th, 2006, 12:51 PM
I think a 1.5 four years ago meant somewhere around the area of 1,500,000 viewers where as these days it now means somewhere in the area of 2,000,000. Am I right?? :cameron08:

smurf
August 4th, 2006, 12:52 PM
And Atlantis?

This is not just an SG-1 problem! Why do people keep saying that, just so they can blame the writing or the quality?
I couldn't say if there is a problem with the writing or quality of SGA as I don't watch it. (It's interesting, but just not interesting enough for me.)

The problem with Atlantis is it doesn't have a strong fanbase of it's own. It seemes to have relied, for the majority of it's rating, on SG-1 fans leaving the television tuned into SciFi. When someone doesn't even tune in for SG-1 they aren't going to switch over for a programme they can take or leave. Notice how the numbers have dropped in both shows by almost exactly the same amount.

Its fanbase seems to have solidified a bit now, since it regularly (always?) gets more viewers than SG-1. But if SG-1 gets cancelled I can see SGA taking another big hit.

MediaSavant
August 4th, 2006, 01:09 PM
I think a 1.5 four years ago meant somewhere around the area of 1,500,000 viewers where as these days it now means somewhere in the area of 2,000,000. Am I right?? :cameron08:

There's a lot of confusion about this. The 1.5 is a household rating. Specifically, it's a coverage household rating. It's the number of households viewing divided into the total number of households that can receive SciFi.

Viewers is different. Ratings can also be expressed for different demographic groups and also exist as an estimate of total viewers. That's viewers of any age watching the show. Because TV shows often have more than one person watching at a time, the # of viewers is always higher than the number of households.

Occasionally, the number of viewers will be mentioned in a press release, but it's not released to the public for every telecast. Some fans try to guess the conversion from households to viewers based on the occasionally published numbers. But, they rarely know them for sure.

A 1.5 coverage rating represents a little over 1.3 million households now. If you use a 1.4 conversion to viewers, you get 1.8 million viewers.

A 1.5 coverage rating in, say, 2003, represented a little less than 1.3 million because the network was slightly smaller in size. It's not a huge difference in the viewer numbers from then to now.

These are educated guestimates, though. We don't have the real numbers.

This website will post the number of viewers for high rated cable shows for individual demos. In this link, you can see the Eureka numbers for Adults 25-54 a few weeks ago:

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_6214.asp

kymeric
August 4th, 2006, 01:14 PM
1.0-1.5 is stargate sg-1s average except for season 7,8, and 9, and seasons 1 and 2 of atlantis. Stargate got REALLY popular with the end of season seven and has just been slowly returning to normal over the years. Stargates are relatively cheap to produce (every planet resembles southern canada) If anything the two shows will get their budgets cut back before theyre outright canned. As long as they can make a profit they will be on.


FYI i just found the stargate infinity series on amazon :-D LOL

STARGATE7777
August 4th, 2006, 01:38 PM
Sorry to be picky but Stargate is filmed in British Columbia. That is definitely western Canada. We have an eastern Canada, Northern and Western. Southern Canada would be United States, I guess.

Descent
August 4th, 2006, 02:11 PM
Sorry to be picky but Stargate is filmed in British Columbia. That is definitely western Canada. We have an eastern Canada, Northern and Western. Southern Canada would be United States, I guess.

Wouldn't Southern technically be Alberta and all those areas?

But anyways, yeah before it'll get canned there'll be budget cuts: Which wouldn't be good at all for SG-1.

STARGATE7777
August 4th, 2006, 02:25 PM
No, sorry...Alberta is still western. Canada is straight across so direction is north (the territories) west ( BC, Alberta, Sask and Manitoba) Eastern (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, PEI and NFLD) Central Canada is Ontario and Quebec. Every province has a southern region. This is how bad this show is. Geography is more interesting.

Zeppan
August 4th, 2006, 04:30 PM
Im not sure.. as to how the sets are located.. but wouldnt cancelling one show bring up the production costs for the other??

Im pretty sure that both SG1 and SGA have a somewhat good cooperation when it comes to CGI work and all that stuff.. for example all the CGI work on Asgaard and Odysseus and daedelus (they basically look the same to us).. they must have some form of co-working since i doubt they just built up a completely new team and database for all the Atlantis graphics... also we are seeing more and more welding together of the two series, the very least TPP and also in near future Jack will visit atlantis aswell as that bald guy(forgot his name :P) I mean they probably can keep the production costs down by lending material or people from eachothers Sets....

And i also feel people are pressing way to much on doomsday here rather than trying to figure out or forsee a better future. What can we do? Id rather do something constructive than just wait and finally get an answer from scifi that they are gonna cancel it, because then its already too late... Rather try to get friends to watch it or donate already now or try to dig up some figures of what they are Earning VS production costs and go from there...

Mitchell82
August 4th, 2006, 04:43 PM
Simply put, it is Sci Fi's fault. SG1's early season ratings drops are due to programming and advertising. It's not that the quality of the show has declined it's the way sci fi is airing the show.
Definatly, this is SCi-Fis fault. The quality of the shows are superb. Sci-Fi screwed with a perfect formula. I think and hope that the ratings are solid enough for a new season. I am loving the new direction of both shows and can't wait for the rest of the year! 19 min people!

Agent_Dark
August 4th, 2006, 05:28 PM
No, I'm saying that SG not being with BSG is BSG's fault.
So it's BSG's fault that because it's not on air, people aren't watching the two Stargate shows that lead up to Galactica???? That doesn't exactly speak well about Stargate...

roseblue
August 4th, 2006, 05:30 PM
I think in general sg-1's ratings have been fairly good. I mean hey, it's still on the air.

Mitchell82
August 4th, 2006, 06:53 PM
I think in general sg-1's ratings have been fairly good. I mean hey, it's still on the air.

I found this website. It look's brand new.

www.freewebs.com/amandatappingexpressions
Nice! The ratings are good menough for a season11. As far as I'm concerned Stargate is doing great! Season 10 and 3 are getting better by the minute!

NotAscended
August 4th, 2006, 07:27 PM
Simply put, it is Sci Fi's fault. SG1's early season ratings drops are due to programming and advertising. It's not that the quality of the show has declined it's the way sci fi is airing the show.

Can't reiterate that enough. Moving the series back to the 9 and 10 pm slots so that they are up against two of the top rated cable programs (on USA) and using a weak and very different lead-in show at 8pm (monster mystery and space adventure don't mix well), combined with a lack of advertising for the Gates was a bad business decision on SciFi's part.

Mitchell82
August 4th, 2006, 07:29 PM
Bad buisness is Sci-Fis biggest fault.They seem to really like to screw up things we like!

SG-25B11
August 4th, 2006, 08:00 PM
Here are season averages since Stargate SG-1 has been on Scifi.

Season 6 1.0 Rating = 0.78 Million Households
Season Ave. 1.7 = 1.33 Million Households

Season 7 1.0 Rating = 0.80 Million Households
Season Ave. 1.8 = 1.42 Million Households

Season 8-10 1.0 Rating = 1.34 Million Households
Season 8 Ave. 2.1 = 2.77 Million Households
Season 9 Ave. 1.8 = 2.47 Million Households
Season 10 Ave.* 1.5 = 2.01 Million Households

* Episodes 10.01-10.03

roseblue
August 4th, 2006, 08:37 PM
what, are people's television sets bugged to let the movie raters know who watches stargate?

Freekzilla
August 4th, 2006, 08:44 PM
Sorry to be picky but Stargate is filmed in British Columbia. That is definitely western Canada. We have an eastern Canada, Northern and Western. Southern Canada would be United States, I guess.

OK, I have to green you for that because it was just very funny.

CrackedButter
August 5th, 2006, 06:46 AM
I live in the UK so forgive me on this, but doesn't the network add the ratings from the first run and then the re-run from later in the night to gather the total number of viewers for the show?

Also why is everybody concerned about one network's ratings, isn't stargate sold to tens of others around the world? That makes money. Doesn't the box sets make money? Series being continued and rest on DVD sales.
We hear in the news about shows being brought back from the dead because of brilliant dvd sales.

Anyway, a really good indication of how popular a series is might be selling the shows on itunes. I haven't bought a single DVD box set but I would buy them online given the chance. I'd buy all 10 seasons in one go!

Anyway, long live Stargate.

reiella
August 5th, 2006, 07:32 AM
Sorry to be picky but Stargate is filmed in British Columbia. That is definitely western Canada. We have an eastern Canada, Northern and Western. Southern Canada would be United States, I guess.

Also of comedic note is the city of Kelowna... :P

kymeric
August 5th, 2006, 07:51 AM
Sorry to be picky but Stargate is filmed in British Columbia. That is definitely western Canada. We have an eastern Canada, Northern and Western. Southern Canada would be United States, I guess.

Lol, sorry see what public schools did to my sense of geography? Here in michigan we just consider canada to be part of the upper penisula. :bratacanime01:

smurf
August 5th, 2006, 08:01 AM
I live in the UK so forgive me on this, but doesn't the network add the ratings from the first run and then the re-run from later in the night to gather the total number of viewers for the show?

Also why is everybody concerned about one network's ratings, isn't stargate sold to tens of others around the world? That makes money. Doesn't the box sets make money? Series being continued and rest on DVD sales.
We hear in the news about shows being brought back from the dead because of brilliant dvd sales.

Anyway, a really good indication of how popular a series is might be selling the shows on itunes. I haven't bought a single DVD box set but I would buy them online given the chance. I'd buy all 10 seasons in one go!

Anyway, long live Stargate.
Because that one network pays for nearly half the cost of each episode's production.
Sci Fi only make money from the advertising shown with the show, if it pulls in low ratings then they can not charge as much for advertising time, and if they don't make enough money from the show they'll find something else that will.
All DVD sales go to MGM/Sony. All sales of the rights to the show in other countries go to MGM/Sony. All sales of the show on itunes would go to MGM/Sony. MGM/Sony could, if they thought it was worthwhile, fund the whole cost themselves and then sell the rights in the USA the same as everywhere else, but it doesn't appear to be something they feel inclined to do. Hence the big deal (by everyone including the suits @ MGM) about whether or not Sci Fi will renew given the low, low ratings.

Freekzilla
August 5th, 2006, 08:32 AM
Because that one network pays for nearly half the cost of each episode's production.
Sci Fi only make money from the advertising shown with the show, if it pulls in low ratings then they can not charge as much for advertising time, and if they don't make enough money from the show they'll find something else that will.
All DVD sales go to MGM/Sony. All sales of the rights to the show in other countries go to MGM/Sony. All sales of the show on itunes would go to MGM/Sony. MGM/Sony could, if they thought it was worthwhile, fund the whole cost themselves and then sell the rights in the USA the same as everywhere else, but it doesn't appear to be something they feel inclined to do. Hence the big deal (by everyone including the suits @ MGM) about whether or not Sci Fi will renew given the low, low ratings.

The SciFi channel is actually a part of the Sony/MGM - NBC group. They're all one big "happy" family. Bet you didn't know that! Still, the gates would be better off at their earlier time slots. They could, and should be, advertising SG on other networks like other shows do. They could advertise the show on NBS without any real problem at all, but they don't. They're not particularly good about fostering fan enthusiasm outside of the shows themselves. They could be doing more to spur fan ferver, but alas they don't.

Dutch_Razor
August 5th, 2006, 09:09 AM
I don't know of any official ratings, but I did see there were over 18,000 people downloading SG1.

Now I know it is a non-topic, but last time there were only about 9000 people (seeders/leechers).

So if this goes over to the tv ratings ,that would mean SG1 would get a 3.0? :D

Maybe the ratings don't turn up that bad after all..

Chevron_nine
August 5th, 2006, 09:16 AM
I hope you realise that the more people who download it (which shouldn't be discussed here as I understand it), the LOWER the ratings will be since less people will be watching it on TV.

PEOPLE, STOP DOWNLOADING AND WATCH IT ON SCI FI (if you can) BEFORE STARGATE GETS CANCELLED.

kyriakos
August 5th, 2006, 10:26 AM
thats not necessarilly true. people from all around the world have access to downloads.. people that dont get scifi..

PG15
August 5th, 2006, 10:34 AM
Exactly. Downloading is very much like TV-watching. If you think the series is bad, you won't waste your internet time on it (the speed slows down because of the downloading).

Those that download will obvious not have access to SciFi, which means they won't count in the Nielsen Ratings, and thus won't affect the ratings of the show.

valaCB
August 5th, 2006, 10:40 AM
I hope so. It was a fantastic episode :)

Dutch_Razor
August 5th, 2006, 11:04 AM
Still waiting to see it :)

And btw how much do you think 18,000 will matter out of 2,000,000 chevron?

And obviously it is easier to watch it on Sci-Fi then to download it, if you are able to get Sci-Fi.

glennh73
August 5th, 2006, 11:32 AM
Actually Stargate is owned by just MGM and not Sony so i think only MGM get the money from Stargate.

Famous
August 5th, 2006, 11:41 AM
And btw how much do you think 18,000 will matter out of 2,000,000 chevron?


Considering we need every person we can get so that the show can keep going, I'd say it matters quite a lot.

Wraith_Hunter
August 5th, 2006, 11:49 AM
Exactly. Downloading is very much like TV-watching. If you think the series is bad, you won't waste your internet time on it (the speed slows down because of the downloading).

Those that download will obvious not have access to SciFi, which means they won't count in the Nielsen Ratings, and thus won't affect the ratings of the show.

It's not like tv watching because it's watched on a computer monitor. It doesn't matter if people download something because they think it's great or a pile of crap. Even if they thought that it was the greatest thing ever, it still harms the show in the long run. As for speeds, I know how to get it within 3 hours of it being aired on a Fri night at full speed. Even the next day or so, it still can go to around 80/90% constant speed. It's only crappy kiddie torre##s that suffer from speed problems.

It doesn't matter if they don't have SciFi or not, chances are unless they live in the north pole then they will get it at some point on another channel.

As to it not affecting the ratings, about that your completely wrong. Both shows have started with poor ratings this season, it may be shown in America first. However a few months later Canadian & UK viewers get it & make up most of the fan base as I know other English speaking countries like Australia etc don't get it until well after the season has already finished. So when these countries finally get it, thousands of viewers have already seen the episode via downloads. Therefore when they finally air in the respective countries, a lot of the fansbase won't watch them because they've already seen them.

This means less viewers, so the tv/cable channels will be willing to pay less to Sony for broadcast rights etc. So with dwindling US audiences, at least if the show does well in other parts of the world, then it's an incentive3 to keep the shows going. However if these start dwindling because of viewers downloading the eps months early. Then Sony is going to one day very soon pull the plug on SG-1 or Atlantis or even both as the financial incentive is no longer there anymore.

Take this as a point, just after new year. The US started a week ahead of the UK. It aired on Fri is the US, while 4 days later on the Tue in the UK. To my astonishment, I read posts from people who admitted downloading the ep on the Fri because they couldn't wait till the Tue. How the fuc# could they contain themselves when Stargate has ended & they a 5/6 month waiting period till new eps came along.

The way things are heading, I think this may be coming close to the end of the road for SG. Wonder how these fans can download shows that aren't even being made any longer!

gkyun
August 5th, 2006, 12:10 PM
That's just one of the problems with a show as successful as Stargate, that people living outside the US don't have the patience to wait 5/6 months for the new seasons and they'd just download the eps as soon as they're up on the net and you can't really blame them 'cause they love Stargate.

Now those who have SciFi but still do downloads are the ones we should despise.

Wraith_Hunter
August 5th, 2006, 12:53 PM
That's just one of the problems with a show as successful as Stargate, that people living outside the US don't have the patience to wait 5/6 months for the new seasons and they'd just download the eps as soon as they're up on the net and you can't really blame them 'cause they love Stargate.

Now those who have SciFi but still do downloads are the ones we should despise.

Why, aren't they both equally as bad as the other? This is the problem, I've heard a few posts on this over the past couple of years. The basic defence for the downloaders is that this generation has created a bunch that are too used to getting everything without having to wait for it! This or the networks for not airing it at the same time as Scifi. This is a bolloc#s & totally unreasonable excuse. Simply because it's made & aimed primarily for US audiences. Therefore they will obviously get first shot. Then comes the fact that other countries don't have as big of a national fanbase. So they won't be paying the same amount of SciFi to get it straight away. Instead they'll hang out for months, just so they can secure a better licensing deal & get it cheaper. However when this does happen, the viewing figures have gone down dramatically from what they expected. This is because most have already downloaded & viewed it months earlier. This means that this particular broadcaster will either leave it many more months again to get a cheaper deal because they don't have the loyal fansbase to support the license fee that was paid to secure the rights to Stargate. Or more likely they will simply stop ordering it at all. This gets back to Sony, who look at the falling figures in their main market. Then look at the falling viewing figures in other countries. Suddenly as the viewing figures are in decline, then will shortly end up as seeing it no longer as a profitable venture. Which ultimately means it'll get it's ass canned.

So for all the illehal downloaders, who only download because they love the show & can't wait a few months till it airs in their respective countries. I ask you this then....How many new eps will they be able to download of their beloved gate when it gets canned? The way things are going, it may be much, much sooner than later!

Descent
August 5th, 2006, 12:59 PM
I really really hope the ratings made a sharp climb up, these seasons have been really great so far. And yes, people who are able to watch the shows live on Sci-Fi but instead choose to download = bad.

Dutch_Razor
August 5th, 2006, 12:59 PM
Uhm HELLO?

A few months?

We are at season 7 right now!

How long do you think that is waiting?

And don't talk about Atlantis because nobody even heard about it here.

And, the channel that airs it, just canceled the reruns of season 1 to where they are now, in the middle of a cliffhanger, because the new Friends or whatever came out.

So how big is the chance they will air the rest of season 7, 8,9,10?

When the ratings from here start to count, Stargate will be as old as star trek I'm sure.

freyr's mother
August 5th, 2006, 01:03 PM
I really really hope the ratings made a sharp climb up,
Don't worry, they'll come back up. Especially because Jack is coming back in the next ep.

Descent
August 5th, 2006, 01:05 PM
Don't worry, they'll come back up. Especially because Jack is coming back in the next ep.

Well thats a given, I have no doubt '200' will be the highest rated episode this season. :jack_new_anime25:

Vandog
August 5th, 2006, 01:07 PM
Why, aren't they both equally as bad as the other? This is the problem, I've heard a few posts on this over the past couple of years. The basic defence for the downloaders is that this generation has created a bunch that are too used to getting everything without having to wait for it! This or the networks for not airing it at the same time as Scifi. This is a bolloc#s & totally unreasonable excuse. Simply because it's made & aimed primarily for US audiences. Therefore they will obviously get first shot. Then comes the fact that other countries don't have as big of a national fanbase. So they won't be paying the same amount of SciFi to get it straight away. Instead they'll hang out for months, just so they can secure a better licensing deal & get it cheaper. However when this does happen, the viewing figures have gone down dramatically from what they expected. This is because most have already downloaded & viewed it months earlier. This means that this particular broadcaster will either leave it many more months again to get a cheaper deal because they don't have the loyal fansbase to support the license fee that was paid to secure the rights to Stargate. Or more likely they will simply stop ordering it at all. This gets back to Sony, who look at the falling figures in their main market. Then look at the falling viewing figures in other countries. Suddenly as the viewing figures are in decline, then will shortly end up as seeing it no longer as a profitable venture. Which ultimately means it'll get it's ass canned.

So for all the illehal downloaders, who only download because they love the show & can't wait a few months till it airs in their respective countries. I ask you this then....How many new eps will they be able to download of their beloved gate when it gets canned? The way things are going, it may be much, much sooner than later!

Point 1: Stargate was supposed to be canned after seasons 5, 6 ( with a movie following full circle which became Lost City Parts 1 and 2), 7, 8, 9 (somewhat anyway). Downloading has been a problem since the show first came out in 1997. Doesn't seem to have slowed the show down at all as the ratings got higher each successive season. Mind you Season 10 is off to a poor start, it has very little to nothing to do with downloads.

Point 2: Stargate is MUCH larger in the UK & France then it is in the US. Way bigger, you can look it up for yourself. The show is not made primarily for the US Audience. That is just ridiculas.

Point 3: Connecting to point 2, Canada get's the entire second half of Atlantis seasons before the US's second have even starts. I'm not sure where you were going with your networks arguements. I admit I may not have understood it properly.

Point 4: SCIFI looks at the numbers for whether or not the show continues, not Sony or MGM. Furthermore, MGM is its own Entity within the Sony Corporation, they would have more involvement with the show then Sony would.

Point 5: The way everyone talks in this forum, all those anti-season threads and hate threads it seems that downloading is the last thing that will get this show canned because so many people already have problems with the show. They've stopped watching because RDA left, they stopped watching because there isn't RDA/SAM shipping. People don't like Cam, people hate Vala. They've stopped watching. There's hundreds of reasons why this show could be canned (not to mention it's 10 years old!), and downloading is at the very bottom of the list.


Edit:

Point 6: for sh*t's and giggles, downloaders had to wait the exact amount of time to see the show as the US audience did during the breaks. Not really a relevent point, but whatever.

freyr's mother
August 5th, 2006, 01:09 PM
Well thats a given, I have no doubt '200' will be the highest rated episode this season. :jack_new_anime25:
Yeah, good point. The ep does look sort of corny and probably wont make any sense, but hey; it jack we're talking about. The atlantis ratings for return will surely be jacked up sky high though.

Vandog
August 5th, 2006, 01:37 PM
Wraith Hunter,

I somewhat regret the statement I made about how ridiculas it is that the show is made solely for the US audience.

I thought about it, it somewhat is. It is SCI-FI that decides whether the show continues or not. SCI-FI decides depending on the ratings the show gets, among other reasons. So it is important that the show do well in the States, so the show should get special attention to attract the US audience more then any other country.

Consider this though, the ratings SCI-FI use are for the US Audience only. How does someone downloading the show from Australia effect the US ratings to which decide whether or not the show continues? It doesn't, in any way. The only problem with downloading would be people downloading it from within the United States rather then watching it on SCI-FI, a channel they can get and no one else can. Furthermore, if that person in the US downloads and they don't have SCI-FI & never did then they have never been important to the US ratings ever since SCI-FI picked up the show ( /run on sentence). It would be nice if they did get SCI-FI though, more people watching in the US the better of course.

Last point. Wouldn't someone downloading from say...from Canada or the UK hurt the ratings in that country when it is finally shown months later on TV there? Possibly, I honestly don't know. But I do know this, SG-1 is HUGE on Space Channel. SG-1 is massively HUGE on Sky-One. Huge enough that they want as much of the show as they can get. Downloading (and the small amount of people that download the show worldwide, considering how many millions and millions watch it on tv) is, at most, a minor irritation to those channels/networks. If it was such a problem for Sci-FI, Sky-One etc... why wouldn't they simply establish a pay-per-episode download service. It is not hard to do! It is also very easy to make that service work only for people within that country (UK Service only services UK citizens etc, sorta like how ITUNES does it, I can not use the US Itunes service because I do not live in America).

Freekzilla
August 5th, 2006, 01:52 PM
Actually Stargate is owned by just MGM and not Sony so i think only MGM get the money from Stargate.

In case you didn't know, Sony bought out MGM. So MGM is a part of Sony now. Sony also owns NBC, and SciFi is part of the NBC group. But Sony is the parent company of all of them now, sorta.

Here's the Official corporate line about it:

MGM is owned by an investor consortium comprised of Providence Equity Partners, Texas Pacific Group, Sony Corporation of America, Comcast Corporation, DLJ Merchant Banking Partners and Quadrangle Group.

Dutch_Razor
August 5th, 2006, 02:02 PM
Oh well I know I watch the eps when they air.

Except with Teal'c as a fireman and Grace ,one time is enough for those.

Although I watched some of Grace's commercial breaks though.

shockwave04
August 5th, 2006, 02:06 PM
unless you DL from the SciFi channel web site (if they give you that option) I think thast illegal.

Vandog
August 5th, 2006, 02:24 PM
unless you DL from the SciFi channel web site (if they give you that option) I think thast illegal.

Downloading is illegal. The point is, downloading from outside the US (while illegal) has nothing to do with SCI-FI's ratings and thus SCI-FI's decision whether or not they "can" the show.

Dutch_Razor
August 5th, 2006, 02:57 PM
unless you DL from the SciFi channel web site (if they give you that option) I think thast illegal.
Not everywhere.

Article 16b of the Dutch copyright law from 1912 states that it is legal to make copies of movies and music, with or without words, as long as it is for personal use only.

PG15
August 5th, 2006, 03:17 PM
So for all the illehal downloaders, who only download because they love the show & can't wait a few months till it airs in their respective countries. I ask you this then....How many new eps will they be able to download of their beloved gate when it gets canned? The way things are going, it may be much, much sooner than later!

Nice scare tactic. :rolleyes:

I'll tell you right now, I do not affect the ratings of any television station. My TV is not being tracked, so noone knows what I watch. Therefore, whether I download or not doesn't matter.

Do you understand?

smurf
August 5th, 2006, 04:38 PM
The SciFi channel is actually a part of the Sony/MGM - NBC group. They're all one big "happy" family. Bet you didn't know that! Still, the gates would be better off at their earlier time slots. They could, and should be, advertising SG on other networks like other shows do. They could advertise the show on NBS without any real problem at all, but they don't. They're not particularly good about fostering fan enthusiasm outside of the shows themselves. They could be doing more to spur fan ferver, but alas they don't.
It's part of the group, but is run as a separate entity. Especially since we are talking about the difference between the production side and the broadcast station side. And especially since MGM is only a very recent aquisition.
Sony owns a whole host of things, but don't be expecting them to be adding Stargate advertising with its PSP.

It's funny, last year the low ratings were blamed on the show being moved to the earlier timeslot - apparently an 8pm start generally causes a loss of roughly 10% compared to 9pm. I'm pretty sure moving it is not going to make the slightest bit of difference to the ratings. It's not as if the 11pm rating has gone up to compensate for all those people who can't watch Monk and SG-1 at the same time.

full.infinity
August 5th, 2006, 05:05 PM
So it's BSG's fault that because it's not on air, people aren't watching the two Stargate shows that lead up to Galactica???? That doesn't exactly speak well about Stargate...
*sigh* I said nothing along those lines. THE ONLY THING I SAID WAS THAT STARGATE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT BSG ISN'T AIRING UNTIL OCTOBER!

Wraith_Hunter
August 5th, 2006, 05:31 PM
Not everywhere.

Article 16b of the Dutch copyright law from 1912 states that it is legal to make copies of movies and music, with or without words, as long as it is for personal use only.

Problem is that it isn't Dutch is it. It'd come under US copyright because it's being shown only in the US, which is how your getting it from a tped SciFi copy. This ofcourse is obtaining it by illegal means. It isn't beiung shown on Dutch TV, so that rule does not apply! Therefore you are breaking the law.


Nice scare tactic.

I'll tell you right now, I do not affect the ratings of any television station. My TV is not being tracked, so noone knows what I watch. Therefore, whether I download or not doesn't matter.

Do you understand?

It isn't a scare tactic, it's the truth!

Of course you don't affect the ratings of any station. When it's shown on something like TMN, you'll watch the repeats when they air, plus buy all the DVD boxsets & all the rest.

Besides it's the old adage here, the 2 of you claim that it doesn't matter. If everybody that downloads it illegally takes this view, then what's the point of even trying to explain the long term consequences.

This is obviously something that you don't understand. However I'm fairly certain that you will within the next year or 2 when one or both of them end. As much as I'd hate that, in a way I almost want it to happen. Just to see all the new eps that you can download then. :mckay:

KoshNaranek
August 5th, 2006, 05:57 PM
for us down under there's no SciFi, and no other option to keep up-to-date except by download...

JohnDuh
August 5th, 2006, 05:59 PM
Well guys its over, the ratings sinking for probably the best episode of SG-1 in a long time. I hate to think it but i see both shows being canned this year.


I'm sorry its my fault. I started to like it and that is the kiss of death I'm afraid.

JohnDuh
August 5th, 2006, 06:04 PM
I hope you realise that the more people who download it (which shouldn't be discussed here as I understand it), the LOWER the ratings will be since less people will be watching it on TV.

PEOPLE, STOP DOWNLOADING AND WATCH IT ON SCI FI (if you can) BEFORE STARGATE GETS CANCELLED.

Nonsense. Only a tiny number of those people (if any) are tailled for the purpose of ratings, and if any of them are fans they will of course make sure to watch it so their 'vote' is counted.

If people think its a crap show they won't watch, but then they would have left anyway because they think its a crap show.

JohnDuh
August 5th, 2006, 06:07 PM
So when these countries finally get it, thousands of viewers have already seen the episode via downloads. Therefore when they finally air in the respective countries, a lot of the fansbase won't watch them because they've already seen them.


And because they know that by not doing so they are sure to get their favorite show cancled... no wait - they don't!

ussrelativity
August 5th, 2006, 06:55 PM
Considering we need every person we can get so that the show can keep going, I'd say it matters quite a lot.

Last night, a friend of mine and I got to watch both SG-1 and Atlantis during the later showings. I am now part of the viewership!

SMEAGOL2
August 5th, 2006, 07:17 PM
I dont think they will cancel them. Not yet. Any word on how episode 4 did?

Orion's Star
August 5th, 2006, 07:26 PM
In case you didn't know, Sony bought out MGM. So MGM is a part of Sony now. Sony also owns NBC, and SciFi is part of the NBC group. But Sony is the parent company of all of them now, sorta.

Here's the Official corporate line about it:

MGM is owned by an investor consortium comprised of Providence Equity Partners, Texas Pacific Group, Sony Corporation of America, Comcast Corporation, DLJ Merchant Banking Partners and Quadrangle Group.

Actually, NBC is owned by GE (80% majority share). And I think it's offically called NBC Universal now, cause Vivendi Universal got a piece of the pie. They have USA, Sci-Fi, Bravo, and a couple other networks under the umbrella.

ToasterOnFire
August 5th, 2006, 08:10 PM
Okay, I think there's some confusion here.

1) Only US households that have a Nielsen box are counted in the ratings. If you don't have a box, it doesn't matter if you watch the show or not. Your viewership doesn't have an impact on ratings or whether or not a show stays on the air.

2) The only way d/ling eps could negatively affect ratings is if enough households with Nielsen boxes are skipping the live showings and d/ling the eps instead. Quite frankly, I don't believe torrenting is that common among the casual viewing audience to make a dent in ratings. If you don't have a Nielsen box or if you're not from the US, it makes no difference whether or not you d/l the eps because you don't have an effect on ratings.

nyxlily
August 5th, 2006, 08:16 PM
Still, given how many people d/l episodes (ableit a small number compared to the general population), wouldn't it make sense for whoever could make it happen make it available to d/l -legally-? Like a number of popular tv shows are doing, either via their own network website or through itunes. I mean.. that's money they could be making right there, quite easily.

the fifth man
August 5th, 2006, 09:43 PM
Still, given how many people d/l episodes (ableit a small number compared to the general population), wouldn't it make sense for whoever could make it happen make it available to d/l -legally-? Like a number of popular tv shows are doing, either via their own network website or through itunes. I mean.. that's money they could be making right there, quite easily.

In the opinions of the networks, it wouldn't be money they could be making, unless you paid a certain fee for downloading. Advertising revenue is key to them, and if you could skip past commercials from a download, advertisers wouldn't pay the networks as much. They want people to watch these shows on tv.

the fifth man
August 5th, 2006, 09:47 PM
I dont think they will cancel them. Not yet. Any word on how episode 4 did?

I think we'll at least get an 11th season of SG-1, and a 4th of SGA.

As for "Insiders", not sure yet. We should know in a few days.

PG15
August 5th, 2006, 09:48 PM
It isn't a scare tactic, it's the truth!

It's a slippery slope. Believe me, every show out there gets downloaded, including Monk (SG1's competition), but I don't see it being on the verge of being cancelled.


Besides it's the old adage here, the 2 of you claim that it doesn't matter. If everybody that downloads it illegally takes this view, then what's the point of even trying to explain the long term consequences.

Beats me. There aren't any long-term consequences as far as I'm concerned. There just aren't enough downloaders out there (18000 vs. 2 million?)


This is obviously something that you don't understand. However I'm fairly certain that you will within the next year or 2 when one or both of them end. As much as I'd hate that, in a way I almost want it to happen. Just to see all the new eps that you can download then. :mckay:

And, we're back to the scare tactic. At least you're consistant.

david2708
August 5th, 2006, 10:43 PM
Hmm. My bet is they'll cancel the show if the numbers don't improve. Best case senario is one of the shows will survive-probably Atlantis as it's the newer show.
Networks are quite ruthless with these things.

Mitchell82
August 5th, 2006, 10:43 PM
I think we'll at least get an 11th season of SG-1, and a 4th of SGA.

As for "Insiders", not sure yet. We should know in a few days.
I agree. The show is in a bit of a drought but by no means id it over. The shows have so much more life left in them. I have a very good feeling that we will get both shows next year. Hey optimisim dosent hurt now does it?
I hope insiders and Sateda got better ratings we shall see.

the fifth man
August 5th, 2006, 10:47 PM
I hope insiders and Sateda got better ratings we shall see.

If they didn't, people don't know what they're missing. These shows still pack quite a punch.:)

Mitchell82
August 5th, 2006, 11:03 PM
If they didn't, people don't know what they're missing. These shows still pack quite a punch.:)
INDEED!:tealc:

Dutch_Razor
August 6th, 2006, 02:40 AM
Problem is that it isn't Dutch is it. It'd come under US copyright because it's being shown only in the US, which is how your getting it from a tped SciFi copy. This ofcourse is obtaining it by illegal means. It isn't beiung shown on Dutch TV, so that rule does not apply! Therefore you are breaking the law.



It isn't a scare tactic, it's the truth!

Of course you don't affect the ratings of any station. When it's shown on something like TMN, you'll watch the repeats when they air, plus buy all the DVD boxsets & all the rest.

Besides it's the old adage here, the 2 of you claim that it doesn't matter. If everybody that downloads it illegally takes this view, then what's the point of even trying to explain the long term consequences.

This is obviously something that you don't understand. However I'm fairly certain that you will within the next year or 2 when one or both of them end. As much as I'd hate that, in a way I almost want it to happen. Just to see all the new eps that you can download then. :mckay:

Unless the Dutch want to deliver me to the US I am only subject to the laws of my country (and the forum rules :P)

And I'd be happy to pay for episodes if they got english subtitles..

ToasterOnFire
August 6th, 2006, 06:54 AM
Beats me. There aren't any long-term consequences as far as I'm concerned. There just aren't enough downloaders out there (18000 vs. 2 million?)
Indeed, and out of that 18000 number how many of those are US viewers with a Nielsen box who also skip the show? A very small number, I'd imagine.

Ezrael
August 6th, 2006, 09:29 AM
They should factor in downloads to their ratings.

I personally download SG1 and Atlantis, I live in the UK and Id rather not wait so long to watch it when it finally comes over here.

I do however watch it on Sky one aswell when we finally air it, as in when Seasons 10 and 3 start here I will watch them again (if sci-fi factor that into their ratings).

You have to remember people around the world love Stargate but only Canada and the USA get it aired first on their tv, the rest of us have to download or wait ages.

I would also think a lot of people like me who download and watch the ep's later aswell will also buy them.

I have all the box sets on dvd and I will get each box set that comes out so Im not denying any income to Sci Fi by downloading, I just want to see my fav show asap :)


You also have to remember there are internet series streaming services where people pay a fee and can then watch and of their fav series over the net through streaming.


Stargate is probably close to 2x more popular than just the ratings of who watches it in the US on SciFi show, you have to factor in the rest of the world to realise just how popular it is. For example I can basically go onto any forum I visit in various areas of life or any game that I play and instantly find someone who likes and watch Stargate. The fanbase really is huge and vast.

Dutch_Razor
August 6th, 2006, 09:41 AM
Indeed, 2/5 times when I said "I'm gonnsa watch SG" the reply was "wth is it on now I'm missing the beginning, cya!"

Well it was "hey I watch it too" but that sounded better :P

SMEAGOL2
August 6th, 2006, 09:50 AM
I wonder when we will get the numbers.?

Dutch_Razor
August 6th, 2006, 09:58 AM
Don't think they work in weekends :)

the fifth man
August 6th, 2006, 09:59 AM
I wonder when we will get the numbers.?

From "Insiders"? Probably in a couple days or so. Someone will post them once they're out somewhere.

Mitchell82
August 6th, 2006, 01:16 PM
From "Insiders"? Probably in a couple days or so. Someone will post them once they're out somewhere.
Can't wait! Lets hope for at least 1.8!

saberhagen83
August 6th, 2006, 01:25 PM
I wish they would show Stargate in Sweden, but they don't. I would have watched it even if I downloded it, just to support it when I know I like it. But even though it got good ratings here, the station droped it and it ain't coming back. One season was all they showed, 5 years after the show started in US and they only ran that first season in re-runs another 3-4 times.:tealcanime51:

That is why I think file sharing is good, it gives me and everyone that want to watch Stargate here a chance to see it. I love the show and so I want to watch new episodes, not having to wait for the boxset before I can watch them. I got all 8 seasons of SG1 and S1 of SGA on DVD from UK sitting on my shelf. Just waiting for next boxsets coming out! Thanks to downloading, Stargate franchise got a new fan and customer.

So really, right or wrong....downloading is more or less my only option to watch the show. Of course I think people in the US that could watch it "live" on SciFi, should do so if they truly enjoy the shows.

Freekzilla
August 6th, 2006, 04:15 PM
Actually, NBC is owned by GE (80% majority share). And I think it's offically called NBC Universal now, cause Vivendi Universal got a piece of the pie. They have USA, Sci-Fi, Bravo, and a couple other networks under the umbrella.

Your right. Sony/MGM are only "partnering" with SciFi/NBC/GE on the SG shows. I was confused because I thought the "partnership" meant that it was a subsidiary of eachother or something. Who knows, they may even own stock in eachother. Which would REALLY confuse things even further. Not that they aren't already mind numbing with all the "partnerships" and subsidiaries and conglomeration. It's like "7 degrees of Kevin Bacon".

I stand corrected and even more confused.

Mitchell82
August 6th, 2006, 05:52 PM
I wish they would show Stargate in Sweden, but they don't. I would have watched it even if I downloded it, just to support it when I know I like it. But even though it got good ratings here, the station droped it and it ain't coming back. One season was all they showed, 5 years after the show started in US and they only ran that first season in re-runs another 3-4 times.:tealcanime51:

That is why I think file sharing is good, it gives me and everyone that want to watch Stargate here a chance to see it. I love the show and so I want to watch new episodes, not having to wait for the boxset before I can watch them. I got all 8 seasons of SG1 and S1 of SGA on DVD from UK sitting on my shelf. Just waiting for next boxsets coming out! Thanks to downloading, Stargate franchise got a new fan and customer.

So really, right or wrong....downloading is more or less my only option to watch the show. Of course I think people in the US that could watch it "live" on SciFi, should do so if they truly enjoy the shows.
While I don't support downloading I'm glad you are able to enjoy the show and hopefully you will get to see season 9 and 10 soon and hopefully get Stargate on TV in Sweeden.

kruegersc4
August 6th, 2006, 06:04 PM
I would be sad if SG-1 ended, but I am very happy with the amount of years it has been running. I think they should end it with season eleven, and conclude the Ori for the most part (but still leave things for movies/new series).

However, I think Atlantis still has many years ahead of it, and I would be utterly dissapointed if it was cancelled. Plus, Even with SG-1 gone, it could continue to have SG-1 characters appear.

the fifth man
August 6th, 2006, 06:44 PM
If I had my way, both SG-1 and SGA would have long futures ahead of them. I think both shows still have many good stories left to tell.

Mitchell82
August 6th, 2006, 06:47 PM
If I had my way, both SG-1 and SGA would have long futures ahead of them. I think both shows still have many good stories left to tell.
Agrred they both have a lot more stories to tell and I have a feeling that we will see a couple more seasons before it is all over.

the fifth man
August 6th, 2006, 06:49 PM
Agrred they both have a lot more stories to tell and I have a feeling that we will see a couple more seasons before it is all over.

I would love nothing more but for that to be true.:)

Mitchell82
August 6th, 2006, 06:52 PM
I would love nothing more but for that to be true.:)
Indeed! Lets hope the power of positive thinking pays off!:tealc: :jack: :daniel: :cameron: :sam:

the fifth man
August 6th, 2006, 06:54 PM
Indeed! Lets hope the power of positive thinking pays off!:tealc: :jack: :daniel: :cameron: :sam:

It better. Or else, I'll have to hurt people.;)

morjana
August 6th, 2006, 08:47 PM
Ratings for the premiere episodes:

From SciFi Wire:

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/

TOP TEN SCIFI CHANNEL SHOWS

ECW-------------------------2.4
Stargate Atlantis-----------1.5 - "No Man's Land"
Stargate SG-1---------------1.4 - "Flesh and Blood"
The Best of Bray Road-------1.2
It Waits--------------------1.2
Dark Angel------------------1.2
Room 6----------------------1.1
Sasquatch Hunters-----------1.0
Freddy vs. Jason------------1.0
Science of Stargate SG-1----0.9

Source: Nielsen Galaxy Report, 7/10/06 -- 7/16/06

(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)

From SciFi Wire:

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/

Top TEN SciFi Channel Shows

Eureka--------------------3.2
ECW-----------------------2.1
Stargate Atlantis---------1.6 - "Misbegotten"
Stargate SG-1-------------1.6 - "Morpheus"
Dragon Dynasty------------1.2
Dead Like Me--------------1.1
The Frighteners-----------1.1
Dark Angel----------------0.9
Dragonfly-----------------0.9
Dragonheart---------------0.9

Source: Nielsen Galaxy Report, 7/17/06 -- 7/23/06

(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)

Morjana

Mitchell82
August 6th, 2006, 08:50 PM
Ratings for the premiere episodes:

From SciFi Wire:

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/

TOP TEN SCIFI CHANNEL SHOWS

ECW-------------------------2.4
Stargate Atlantis-----------1.5 - "No Man's Land"
Stargate SG-1---------------1.4 - "Flesh and Blood"
The Best of Bray Road-------1.2
It Waits--------------------1.2
Dark Angel------------------1.2
Room 6----------------------1.1
Sasquatch Hunters-----------1.0
Freddy vs. Jason------------1.0
Science of Stargate SG-1----0.9

Source: Nielsen Galaxy Report, 7/10/06 -- 7/16/06

(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)

From SciFi Wire:

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/

Top TEN SciFi Channel Shows

Eureka--------------------3.2
ECW-----------------------2.1
Stargate Atlantis---------1.6 - "Misbegotten"
Stargate SG-1-------------1.6 - "Morpheus"
Dragon Dynasty------------1.2
Dead Like Me--------------1.1
The Frighteners-----------1.1
Dark Angel----------------0.9
Dragonfly-----------------0.9
Dragonheart---------------0.9

Source: Nielsen Galaxy Report, 7/17/06 -- 7/23/06

(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)

Morjana

SG1-Spoilergate http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/SG1-Spoilergate/
Richard Dean Anderson Fans http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/rdandersonfans/
Fans of Joe Flanigan http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/fansofjoeflanigan/
Pop Syndicate - SGA episode reviews http://popsyndicate.com
Abydos Gate Morjana http://jack.stargate-sg1.hu/morjana/
Dag blast it stupid ECW! Eureka will bottom out but whoever thought that putting ECW on Sci-Fi was a good idea needs to be Zatted!

Daedalus-304
August 6th, 2006, 10:18 PM
Dag blast it stupid ECW! Eureka will bottom out but whoever thought that putting ECW on Sci-Fi was a good idea needs to be Zatted!

Yes, that ECW really damages the respectability of the Sci-Fi channel, and Eureka looks like many other shows that are canceled after one season.

saberhagen83
August 6th, 2006, 11:22 PM
While I don't support downloading I'm glad you are able to enjoy the show and hopefully you will get to see season 9 and 10 soon and hopefully get Stargate on TV in Sweeden.

I hope so too. Myself and many others are still trying to get any channel we have to pick it up. But I'm afraid most, if not all channels, don't really like/want to show SciFi. We have nearly no such shows here, most of what's on TV is just reality shows. :S

Dromag67
August 7th, 2006, 02:01 AM
Downloading probably doesnt hurt ratings at all, the only thing that hurts ratings is when they put it in a time slot with a bunch of other popular network shows, and break up a stellar 3 show lineup for the sake of running the shows all year long. :sheppardanime31:

DanielFullard
August 7th, 2006, 02:53 AM
Wow....ECW is tanking the competition.

tommiekins
August 7th, 2006, 03:16 AM
If stargate is the thrid and fourth ranked shows, cancelling them wouldn't make much sense now would it. Especially since the other shows don't get ratings as high.

Oka
August 7th, 2006, 05:24 AM
Downloading could hurt the show. Why? Well first of all, let's establish that it's mostly people outside the U.S. who download Stargate. Why? Because they don't have access to the Sci-Fi channel.

This means they they can't affect ratings in any way. What they can affect however, is DVD sales and ratings when the shows in air in their respective countries (no channel is going to buy the show if no one watches it). A lot of fans are going to buy the DVD's even though they've already seen the show but a LARGE number of people will just save it on the computer - and not buy it, this is what hurts the show.

However, let's also establish that with broadband being widespread all over the globe, the idea of shows only airing on cable-tv has become archaic. How the networks are going to solve this is something that's being discussed at the momen. Since it's the advertisments that ultimately pays for the show - and when people download something, they're not going to want to watch the advertisment since it can so easily be edited out from the program it certainly posses a problem for the future of television.

To everyone who download tv-shows: Watch it when it airs in your country, buy the DVD's and support the shows you love in any way you can!

Jonzey
August 7th, 2006, 07:54 AM
Downloading could hurt the show. Why? Well first of all, let's establish that it's mostly people outside the U.S. who download Stargate. Why? Because they don't have access to the Sci-Fi channel.

This means they they can't affect ratings in any way. What they can affect however, is DVD sales and ratings when the shows in air in their respective countries (no channel is going to buy the show if no one watches it). A lot of fans are going to buy the DVD's even though they've already seen the show but a LARGE number of people will just save it on the computer - and not buy it, this is what hurts the show.

However, let's also establish that with broadband being widespread all over the globe, the idea of shows only airing on cable-tv has become archaic. How the networks are going to solve this is something that's being discussed at the momen. Since it's the advertisments that ultimately pays for the show - and when people download something, they're not going to want to watch the advertisment since it can so easily be edited out from the program it certainly posses a problem for the future of television.

To everyone who download tv-shows: Watch it when it airs in your country, buy the DVD's and support the shows you love in any way you can!
It doesn't affect the show. The Sci Fi channel in the USA doesn't give a damn about the ratings in other countries. And nor should they, since they don't get anything from them.

Oka
August 7th, 2006, 10:18 AM
It doesn't affect the show. The Sci Fi channel in the USA doesn't give a damn about the ratings in other countries. And nor should they, since they don't get anything from them.
NBC Universal owns the Sci-Fi channel, correct? And since NBC sells the show to other countries, wouldn't that revenue be beneficial since NBC Universal also funds the shows on Sci-Fi?

Mitchell82
August 7th, 2006, 10:31 AM
I hope so too. Myself and many others are still trying to get any channel we have to pick it up. But I'm afraid most, if not all channels, don't really like/want to show SciFi. We have nearly no such shows here, most of what's on TV is just reality shows. :S
Oh that sucks! There are too many reality shows already, and if thats all your channels show, I bet you really get caught up on sports or reading!;)

Mitchell82
August 7th, 2006, 10:44 AM
If stargate is the thrid and fourth ranked shows, cancelling them wouldn't make much sense now would it. Especially since the other shows don't get ratings as high.
Very good point. But lets hope that Skiffy is as logical. However I fear they are just stupid.

jenks
August 7th, 2006, 10:50 AM
Even if I had SciFi I wouldn't watch Stargate on it, they air at such daft times. There's no way I am staying in on a Friday night just to watch Stargate...

Mitchell82
August 7th, 2006, 11:02 AM
Even if I had SciFi I wouldn't watch Stargate on it, they air at such daft times. There's no way I am staying in on a Friday night just to watch Stargate...
Thats a shame. Stargate is deffinatly worth Starying home on a Friday night. Of course thats just my opinion.:cameron:

drizzt86
August 7th, 2006, 11:10 AM
Dude, im in college and party like every weekend, and u can def make room for Stargate. Watch it before u go out to party. And if that fails, DVR it then watch it the next day (depending on how bad ur hangover is)...that is how i survive stargate on a friday night

Jonzey
August 7th, 2006, 11:12 AM
NBC Universal owns the Sci-Fi channel, correct? And since NBC sells the show to other countries, wouldn't that revenue be beneficial since NBC Universal also funds the shows on Sci-Fi?
No, the adverts fund the shows. Sci Fi decides whether or not to renew SG-1, since it's their channel and they decide what to show. If Sci Fi wants to cancel Stargate, the fact that it does well overseas is not gonna stop them, since they don't profit from that.

(If I'm wrong about any of this, please correct me)

Mitchell82
August 7th, 2006, 11:19 AM
Dude, im in college and party like every weekend, and u can def make room for Stargate. Watch it before u go out to party. And if that fails, DVR it then watch it the next day (depending on how bad ur hangover is)...that is how i survive stargate on a friday night
Definatly. There is more than one way to skin Mckays caot.LOL;) :cameron:

saberhagen83
August 7th, 2006, 11:43 AM
Oh that sucks! There are too many reality shows already, and if thats all your channels show, I bet you really get caught up on sports or reading!;)

Well sure there are some good shows on like CSI and Cold Case, that I watch at times. But sometimes these channels never advertise that they will air new episodes while you would still think they are showing re-runs. they jump back and forth on that too much. Some shows I really liked was cut of after a season or two never showing the rest, like SG1. They showed season 1, and with that cliffhanger...I wanted to blow something up. :)

I have little hope any channel will pick up the shows. Too bad, considering it did well when they aired the 1st season. Never understood why they never showed the rest. But I'm quite happy enjyoing a nice book of SGA atm :D

Ezrael
August 7th, 2006, 05:18 PM
Ofc they profit from it airing oversees, it airs overseas because the broadcasters in other country's buy the rights to broadcast each season off Sci-Fi.

Mitchell82
August 7th, 2006, 10:10 PM
Well sure there are some good shows on like CSI and Cold Case, that I watch at times. But sometimes these channels never advertise that they will air new episodes while you would still think they are showing re-runs. they jump back and forth on that too much. Some shows I really liked was cut of after a season or two never showing the rest, like SG1. They showed season 1, and with that cliffhanger...I wanted to blow something up. :)

I have little hope any channel will pick up the shows. Too bad, considering it did well when they aired the 1st season. Never understood why they never showed the rest. But I'm quite happy enjyoing a nice book of SGA atm :D
Well thats good. At least you are getting your fill of Stargate the best way you can.:docianime15:

Avatar28
August 7th, 2006, 11:33 PM
No, the adverts fund the shows. Sci Fi decides whether or not to renew SG-1, since it's their channel and they decide what to show. If Sci Fi wants to cancel Stargate, the fact that it does well overseas is not gonna stop them, since they don't profit from that.

(If I'm wrong about any of this, please correct me)

Actually, MGM funds the show. Sci-Fi pays a significant amount, probably the lion's share of the production costs, for first run rights to it. MGM makes further money via syndication, DVD sales, merchandising, etc. Even if sci-fi dropped the show it's still possible that MGM might continue making it and might could even get another network to pick it up. G4 or Spike for instance. Their viewerships seem rather inclined to shows like that, hence the reason for them showing STTNG et al.

Also as stated if you don't have a Nielson box you don't get tallied. If you have a Tivo, though, I think they do look at every user who opts in to the program so their figures are a bit better.

Does anyone know how much it costs per episode to make the show? I know that I would pay $2-3/episode for it. Especially if it was in good quality (at least SDTV resolution if not HDTV and with Dolby 5.1 sound). That would certainly make a nice additional revenue stream. If 500,000 people purchased a download at $3/ea, say, that would be an extra 1.5 million per episode.

And to whoever said that watching it on a computer monitor isn't the same as watching it on TV, wanna bet? When you've got a 52" computer monitor it IS the same. :)

Jonzey
August 8th, 2006, 12:57 AM
Actually, MGM funds the show. Sci-Fi pays a significant amount, probably the lion's share of the production costs, for first run rights to it. MGM makes further money via syndication, DVD sales, merchandising, etc. Even if sci-fi dropped the show it's still possible that MGM might continue making it and might could even get another network to pick it up. G4 or Spike for instance. Their viewerships seem rather inclined to shows like that, hence the reason for them showing STTNG et al.

AH ok, thanks for the correction. But Sci Fi still has the decision of whether or not to cancel it, based on US Nielson ratings only, right?

But if they do, MGM can take it elsewhere.

MediaSavant
August 8th, 2006, 02:20 AM
Very good point. But lets hope that Skiffy is as logical. However I fear they are just stupid.

If it happens, MGM will be part of the decision and it will be partly made due to costs. The producers have hinted as much.

Avatar28
August 8th, 2006, 03:35 AM
That is correct, as far as I understand it. I would really like to see a company come through and work out a deal with all the cable companies to collect viewing info of customers with cable boxes, satellite too if they have a way to collect that (on a strictly opt-in basis, of course). I think that might present a more thorough picture of the nation's viewing habits, though I don't know if it would be scientific enough.

Descent
August 8th, 2006, 06:47 AM
Wow....ECW is tanking the competition.

Its depressing isn't it...I feel those are the kinds of ratings Atlantis and SG-1 should be getting these days.

full.infinity
August 8th, 2006, 11:24 AM
If it happens, MGM will be part of the decision and it will be partly made due to costs. The producers have hinted as much.
Both MGM and NBC(which owns the channel) are owned by Sony IIRC.

Arative
August 8th, 2006, 11:46 AM
Both MGM and NBC(which owns the channel) are owned by Sony IIRC.

Sony owns MGM, bought it for the movie database it has so it can start releasing movies on the HD-DVD format.

General Electric owns NBC, which also owns USA, Bravo, Sci-fi and MSNBC, maybe a couple of channels.

morjana
August 8th, 2006, 12:11 PM
Sony owns MGM, bought it for the movie database it has so it can start releasing movies on the HD-DVD format.

General Electric owns NBC, which also owns USA, Bravo, Sci-fi and MSNBC, maybe a couple of channels.


MGM recently opted out with Sony with regard to DVD distribution.

Morjana

Farscapefan
August 8th, 2006, 02:03 PM
MGM recently opted out with Sony with regard to DVD distribution.

Morjana

All around the world? That would be bad, 'cause season 9 DVDs (UK release) are really great, they subtitled not only episodes, but commentaries and another Extra features as well.

esoap524
August 8th, 2006, 05:21 PM
Its depressing isn't it...I feel those are the kinds of ratings Atlantis and SG-1 should be getting these days.

It's that whole mass appeal thing. There's no getting past it, it seems. And even though it's a weird programming concept (sci fi and wrestling?) it seems to be doing the trick ratings-wise for the network.

Mitchell82
August 8th, 2006, 08:19 PM
Is it just me or are all the networks making crappy reality shows and wrestling etc.. and cancelling the good shows b/c they want to market to teenagers. Back on topic the ratings are lower but I don't see the shows demise inament (yet).

esoap524
August 8th, 2006, 08:32 PM
Is it just me or are all the networks making crappy reality shows and wrestling etc.. and cancelling the good shows b/c they want to market to teenagers. Back on topic the ratings are lower but I don't see the shows demise inament (yet).

I don't think it's the marketing to teenagers part. I really think it's a matter of cost. for some reason, these types of shows have a mass appeal and they're cheap to produce.

I really think separating Battlestar Galactica from the Stargates, effectively dismantling Sci-fi Friday, didn't help either. If nothing else, BSG got good buzz. Even though their ratings weren't significantly, if at all, better than the Stargates, there was just something about the Sci Fi Friday line up that was good marketing. You really don't hear much about Sci Fi Friday anymore...if you hear anything at all. SG1 and SGA aren't so heavily serialized that you can't jump on the ride mid-stream.

I wonder how Battlestar will fare on its own. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a dip in ratings there as well.

Mitchell82
August 8th, 2006, 08:39 PM
I don't think it's the marketing to teenagers part. I really think it's a matter of cost. for some reason, these types of shows have a mass appeal and they're cheap to produce.

I really think separating Battlestar Galactica from the Stargates, effectively dismantling Sci-fi Friday, didn't help either. If nothing else, BSG got good buzz. Even though their ratings weren't significantly, if at all, better than the Stargates, there was just something about the Sci Fi Friday line up that was good marketing. You really don't hear much about Sci Fi Friday anymore...if you hear anything at all. SG1 and SGA aren't so heavily serialized that you can't jump on the ride mid-stream.

I wonder how Battlestar will fare on its own. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a dip in ratings there as well.
I agree. It's always about money, and I bet BSG will take a huge hit conisdering they will have much stiffer compition than Stargate does now. Every network will have it's regular shows on and to be honest I like BSG but I've watched those other shows longer so I might be one of the people not watching BSG.

the fifth man
August 8th, 2006, 08:39 PM
I wonder how Battlestar will fare on its own. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a dip in ratings there as well.

That's what I'm expecting personally. I think Sci-Fi never should have broken up it's Sci-Fi Friday lineup. They may learn this lesson the hard way.

Mitchell82
August 8th, 2006, 08:51 PM
That's what I'm expecting personally. I think Sci-Fi never should have broken up it's Sci-Fi Friday lineup. They may learn this lesson the hard way.
Agreed! Sci-FI:tealcanime23:

Osiris-RA
August 8th, 2006, 09:02 PM
ECW? Who the frack's watching that???

Just wait till BSG returns, ECW won't have a frackin' prayer.

Sci Fi needs help with it's programming. Programming gods! Have mercy!! HAVE MERCY!

nyxlily
August 8th, 2006, 09:08 PM
I thought I read somewhere that the reason BSG was moved to Oct. was because they needed more time in the production department. So it wasn't really a choice they had to make, but rather out of necessity.

Though it does not excuse Sci Fi for the extreme lack of promotion.. beside the 200. Yes, it is a big milestone, but how about getting viewers tuned in on the regular episodes?

Mitchell82
August 8th, 2006, 09:11 PM
The ratings are disapointing however I find sollace in the fact that despite ratings season 10 ROCKS!:indeed:

the fifth man
August 8th, 2006, 09:13 PM
I thought I read somewhere that the reason BSG was moved to Oct. was because they needed more time in the production department. So it wasn't really a choice they had to make, but rather out of necessity.

Though it does not excuse Sci Fi for the extreme lack of promotion.. beside the 200. Yes, it is a big milestone, but how about getting viewers tuned in on the regular episodes?

Sci-Fi has definitely made it's share of mistakes concerning these two shows. Now, the Stargates may pay for those mistakes. Such a shame too, because I'm really enjoying things right now.:(

Metonic
August 8th, 2006, 09:25 PM
HOW THE HELL DOES ECW BRING IN SO MANY PEOPLE! They were going out of business before WWF bought them out... ECW sucks..

JaceGate
August 8th, 2006, 09:27 PM
I can not believe rateings are this low. I have not been with the SG1 & SGA long only a couple of seasons. I am trying to find the time to get to more conventions to enjoy it while i can. There just is not any other good shows out there. I can not loose these. I was at least hoping for another couple of seasons out of SG1 and Many more seasons out of SGA plus i like the idea of a third spin off Series SG? Even a possible Movie. Either the movie or the SG? could also raise viewership. I also heard that running both SG1 and SGA together saves the Studio some $$ in production costs. This is a two sided sword because this makes both shows cheaper but if one were to end it would up the cost on the second. Not good for the second show.
In any event i can only hope the number of fans are here to support the show and Scifi, MGM etc.. keep it on the air.

[SGC_ReplicĂ…tors]
August 8th, 2006, 10:13 PM
ummm....i ran a search on Eureka and ECW...i got some wrestling thing for ECW and Eureka i got vacuum cleaners....

....can some1 plz explain what these shows are thx

nyxlily
August 8th, 2006, 10:18 PM
ECW IS a wrestling thing. Scifi.com can probably answer the Eureka question more adequately. In fact, they have the pilot episode online that you could watch via scifi pulse.

Paul Swann
August 8th, 2006, 10:35 PM
ECW IS a wrestling thing. Scifi.com can probably answer the Eureka question more adequately. In fact, they have the pilot episode online that you could watch via scifi pulse.

If TPTB at Scifi were smart, they would take advantage of new shows such as ECW, Eureka. They do bring a new audience to the network, with that said, if I was in charge of such things (IMHO):

More promotion on Scifi: Tonight was good in Eureka, I'd like to see more of it in shows like ECW, introduce your new audience to what the network has to offer. Scifi has been given a gift, an audience that might not turn on Scifi again until next Tuesday, show them what they are missing. Scifi could take a few notes from the WWE while I'm at it, I know what's going on in the world of the WWE because they promo, they love frequency. More frequency on Scifi is good to recycle your audience.
More cross-promotion: Use the other networks to cross-promote your products. If I'm watching USA, let me know what's on Sci-fi, etc. BSG on NBC was a nice way to introduce an audience to a show, in HD no less. Not only did BSG get frequency with the core audience on Scifi, the promotion on other networks increased the reach of the message "Hey watch BSG."
Expand the brand: Where are my Stargate SG-1 toys, video games, mugs, tee-shirts, etc. These things do work, I spot tee-shirts with our company logo on the back all the time, we printed those things three years ago.
Itunes or Scifi Pulse: Sure didn't hurt shows like Lost to get the full episode the next day. Of course, this might hurt the overall plan as SG-1 is shown across the globe on different schedules.

That's just my .02 on the matter.

mburrows
August 8th, 2006, 10:40 PM
why are the ratings so low right now, this really sucks, i hope it dun stick like this, id hate to see sg1 end, id rather have it Starget Command, not even have the original cast members, then it being shut down:(