PDA

View Full Version : Good bye Atlantis?



ColCaldwell
October 2nd, 2007, 09:46 PM
With Adrift only getting a 1.2 rating, I have a feeling this is the last season.

Tith
October 2nd, 2007, 09:55 PM
Jumping the gun a bit aren't we?

I think that untill Reunion, Travellers and Tabula Rasa (at least) have aired WITHOUT ANY MORE EPISODE LEAKS, Sci-Fi, MGM or anyone else can't really get a good picture of what the seasons ratings should be expected.

I'm not saying don't speculate. But don't toll the bells just yet.

Agent_Dark
October 3rd, 2007, 12:26 AM
hello atlantis

Franklyn Blaze
October 3rd, 2007, 12:35 AM
Ya hi, can I have some more please?

IWKYZerocool
October 3rd, 2007, 12:44 AM
With Adrift only getting a 1.2 rating, I have a feeling this is the last season.

But in a past thread didn't it say that only some people have the correct setup box (don't know what it is called) in America which adds to the ratings.

Defiant
October 3rd, 2007, 01:17 AM
I was thinking this could be the last series when I heard they were putting it on a 22:00 slot in the US

Trig
October 3rd, 2007, 02:03 AM
Do time slots really matter that much these days, tbh ALL of the TV channels need to be looking to the internet as a valid form of broadcasting.

They should also be bringing in new production teams after 2 seasons so theres long enough for the team to make things fit but often enough to bring in new ideas etc.

Another thing that also needs to be done is slowing down.
Stargate as a universe or a brand or whatever you call it isnt going anywhere, IMHO theres no need to rush another spin off from the 2nd planned SG1 movie otherwise were going to get into a situation like the one the StarTrek universe did, too much too often and people get bored of it, yes theres a hardcore fan base out there that'll watch it all and buy all the DVD's but there are more people out there that are more a casual watcher and will soon get bored with it, then the figures go down and things get scrapped..
Look at Atlantis, was bringing in a spin off a bad idea, maybe Atlantis should of been brought in as a spin off from the first DVD Movie (Still with the Ori ending but beating the Ori could of come around with the discovery of Atlantis) and then done that way instead of being ran parallel to SG1...

Klenotka
October 3rd, 2007, 02:13 AM
Too bad that Sci-Fi cares only about commercials. I know, it´s basic of every television but without counting iTunes or internet players (lots of people even don´t have television any more!) is it pointless to count ratings. And most of people don´t have Nielsen box. This is unfair and stupid system.
But, I think that Sci-Fi should kick its own ass for letting some of their employee to get Adrift and Lifeline out and to make such stupid mistake like release Doppleganger isntead of Adrift. Another numbers of episodes or not, here we can see that the person who sent it to iTunes knows nothing about SGA and what people work with it.

Klenotka
October 3rd, 2007, 02:21 AM
Oh, I am sorry, you "know-it-all". *bows*

Ratings and commercials are connected, that´s what I wanted to say. Without ratings, the commercials won´t be sold. The tv show becomes unprofitable, so it gets cancelled. Simple as that.
I have no idea how Nielsen box works, but I suppose it´s something like people-meters we have here (yeah, I am NOT from US):rolleyes:

g.o.d
October 3rd, 2007, 02:25 AM
bye SGA, it was a great year with season 1. I won't miss you

Agent_Dark
October 3rd, 2007, 03:21 AM
I have no idea how Nielsen box works
so maybe you should stop commenting on how crap a system it is? Seriously, and this is no offence intended personally or anything, but how can you judge a system when you don't even know how it works?

Klenotka
October 3rd, 2007, 03:41 AM
So try to choose different words next time so it doesn´t sound like an insult. Or try to explain, if you know it. There is no need to be negative.
And I have no idea how it works into details but as I understand it correctly, it is similar to people-meter. If is it so then it´s unfair because it works only at people who have it (of course). So it doesn´t count the others who might watching and are without Nielsen box. That is why I say it´s unfair.

g.o.d-you haven´t seen S4 yet. So I would wait if I were you.

Agent_Dark
October 3rd, 2007, 03:55 AM
So try to choose different words next time so it doesn´t sound like insult. Or try to explain, if you know it. There is no need to be negative.
And I have no idea how it works into details but as I understand it correctly, it is similar to people-meter. If is it so then it´s unfair because it works only at people who have it (of course) and don´t count the others who might watching, just don´t have Nielsen box. That is why I say it´s unfair.
It's called statistical sampling, and something you'd learn in any maths course that covers statistics. There's no need to sample every single person watching TV because that would be much too unwieldy (and expensive). A sample size is carefully selected to be representative of the entire population. It's not 'unfair' that you specifically aren't being counted, because you are being represented by the sampling. It just maths.

Maybe next time you could take things less personally. Not everyone is out to get you. Or maybe do some research rather draw judgement on something you admit to not knowing. It's not hard to google something these days...

g.o.d
October 3rd, 2007, 04:41 AM
g.o.d-you haven´t seen S4 yet. So I would wait if I were you.

I've seen 401,402, 404 and only Lifeline was a good episode. Rest could be ok, but I really doubt it

Darren
October 3rd, 2007, 04:50 AM
Well, it doesn't look wonderful ... but I'm not ready to give up just yet. The bad news is that the show's ratings are way, way down from where they once were at their height.

But the good news is that the show is basically doing just as well as anything else that SCI FI has right now. They can't afford to cancel everything.

The bigger issue than just the ratings is the ratio of ratings (viewership) to costs. If the network thinks it can get equivalent ratings with a Eureka or a Dresden Files, which I would guess cost a bit less to make, it will be less likely to want to spend the money on Atlantis.

Briangate78
October 3rd, 2007, 05:39 AM
With Adrift only getting a 1.2 rating, I have a feeling this is the last season.

I honestly don't think so. Plus i think that number is a little off. 1.7 million is not a 1.2!

Anyway, Eureka got a 1.2 that week, GH got a 1.4 which was the top show of the week. Why would they cancel Atlantis if it fell into the top 3 of their shows?

The network ratings bar is now down. The network average is down to like a 0.8 to 0.9. So if SGA is getting a 1.2, don't you think that is good?

Also MGM will do everything possible to get that 5th season. They make a lot of money on the other markets, so they can compromise with Sci-fi a little more.

Oh and one more thing, the DVR counts will come in Friday, that should be very interesting since SGA is the most DVR'd show.

Defiant
October 3rd, 2007, 06:26 AM
So try to choose different words next time so it doesn´t sound like an insult. Or try to explain, if you know it. There is no need to be negative.
And I have no idea how it works into details but as I understand it correctly, it is similar to people-meter. If is it so then it´s unfair because it works only at people who have it (of course). So it doesn´t count the others who might watching and are without Nielsen box. That is why I say it´s unfair.

g.o.d-you haven´t seen S4 yet. So I would wait if I were you.

If it's anything like the UK system (BARB) it's crap. They have 5100 households and they basically put those viewing figures together and then presume they know what 60 MILLION people are watching. It was once said that a long distance lorry driver made up the entire viewing figures of one channel because he had one of those 5100 households lol


I know in the UK they could (if they wanted) use data from cable boxes and satellite stb's to get a better picture of who watches what

Tittamiire
October 3rd, 2007, 06:40 AM
If it's anything like the UK system (BARB) it's crap. They have 5100 households and they basically put those viewing figures together and then presume they know what 60 MILLION people are watching. It was once said that a long distance lorry driver made up the entire viewing figures of one channel because he had one of those 5100 households lol


I know in the UK they could (if they wanted) use data from cable boxes and satellite stb's to get a better picture of who watches what

It's called sampling and is statistically sound. As has been mentioned above it is impractical to record what everyone is watching and thus a representative sample is selected that is determined to be large enough to be representative of the whole sample. The sample size is determined as a balance between getting a larger size as possible within the reasonable limits of cost and general practical considerations. It is how data is gathered the world over and has been for a long time, it isn't crap, it's statistics.

P-90_177
October 3rd, 2007, 06:57 AM
If it's anything like the UK system (BARB) it's crap. They have 5100 households and they basically put those viewing figures together and then presume they know what 60 MILLION people are watching. It was once said that a long distance lorry driver made up the entire viewing figures of one channel because he had one of those 5100 households lol


I know in the UK they could (if they wanted) use data from cable boxes and satellite stb's to get a better picture of who watches what

really? that's how it's done over here? someone should do something about that system. though i can understand that it is somewhat easier.

Lex Reekie
October 3rd, 2007, 06:57 AM
Sampling would be fair if everyone were robots, but we're not. These representitive families have lives that change from day to day, emotions and whims that fluctuate widely all over the place... maybe that's a bit much but my point is, everyone is different, everyone's life is different, so while statistical sampling may be more convenient, it's definatly not fair and never could be.

And just incase an example is necessary... let's say I represent the male 18-49 range (can't remember the precises ranges), and I watch SGA every week. Then I get a girlfriend that hates it and is always over when it airs, so I DVR it instead. Does that fairly represent all the other 18-49 males with a better choice of girlfriend and no Neilsen box?

Defiant
October 3rd, 2007, 11:21 AM
It is how data is gathered the world over and has been for a long time, it isn't crap, it's statistics.

It's said 25 million households in the UK have TV yet 9 million of them have satellite and 3 million have cable so the stats those stbs send back is a damn site more accurate than what 5100 households tell us.

I've heard people try and protect BARB like this before and they turned out to be BBC people because BBC have the luxury of channel slots 1 & 2. Also BARB refuse to tell the public if the % of the platforms is statistically correct in those 5100 holdholds ie analogue, Freeview, Cable & satellite as I'm sure you know ;)

s09119
October 3rd, 2007, 01:05 PM
If Sci-Fi goes ONLY by Nielson ratings... then yes, probably. But they should know by now just how huge the Stargate franchise has become. And if they don't, they don't deserve to be showing it.

Mitchell82
October 3rd, 2007, 01:09 PM
I honestly don't think so. Plus i think that number is a little off. 1.7 million is not a 1.2!

Anyway, Eureka got a 1.2 that week, GH got a 1.4 which was the top show of the week. Why would they cancel Atlantis if it fell into the top 3 of their shows?

The network ratings bar is now down. The network average is down to like a 0.8 to 0.9. So if SGA is getting a 1.2, don't you think that is good?

Also MGM will do everything possible to get that 5th season. They make a lot of money on the other markets, so they can compromise with Sci-fi a little more.

Oh and one more thing, the DVR counts will come in Friday, that should be very interesting since SGA is the most DVR'd show.
Exactly. I did the number crunching myself. 1.7 mill should be around a 1.4. With the network being down and scifi still considering it a top show I am trying not to worry. I think it will be ok.

Turbo
October 3rd, 2007, 02:46 PM
I've posted this in the news forum, but I think it bears repeating here:

Last year, I would have said that there's no way Sci-Fi would keep Atlantis around for another year with a 1.2 rating, however...

1) Their original series that started this year (Painkiller Jane and Flash Gordon) are bombs.
2) They've cancelled BSG and The Dresden Files.
3) Friday night numbers are down for TV in general, even the networks.
4) There's a writers' strike coming up soon, something I believe that Atlantis is exempt from, being a Canadian-produced show.

However, if the numbers don't improve, I think that Season 5 will be the last. I just hope they don't split it in half, like they're talking about doing with BSG's final season.

Briangate78
October 3rd, 2007, 07:20 PM
Exactly. I did the number crunching myself. 1.7 mill should be around a 1.4. With the network being down and scifi still considering it a top show I am trying not to worry. I think it will be ok.

Apparently they are taking DVR'ing into major consideration and can tweak the ratings. Since SGA is one of the biggest shows DVR'd, it could bring the ratings up to like a 1.4 to 1.5!

vjlax18
October 4th, 2007, 08:52 AM
How about putting the show on at 8pm instead of 10pm? They talked about the 18-34 year old crowd and they also talked about DVR's. Well if they're concerned about the 18-34's then why would they put the show on at 10pm on a Friday?

ColCaldwell
October 4th, 2007, 09:01 AM
If Sci-Fi goes ONLY by Nielson ratings... then yes, probably. But they should know by now just how huge the Stargate franchise has become. And if they don't, they don't deserve to be showing it.

The problem is that Sci Fi channel doesn't see any of the international broadcasts or DVD revenue. They are strictly on their ratings since they provide the bulk of the budget.

jenks
October 4th, 2007, 12:57 PM
http://forum.gateworld.net/showthread.php?t=45127

Ripple in Space
October 4th, 2007, 01:04 PM
To be honest, the Nielsen system doesn't make much sense. They've acknowledged that it needs some work. I figure that since in 2009 the US is going all digital, they could get legitimate readings off of everyone's TV that consents to it.

But even then, I don't see Stargate ratings getting a huge bump. I mean SG-1 was one of my fav shows of all time (top 25 easily), but even I admit that it wasn't exactly the best written show around, and while not many people hate it, as some do Trek, many haven't seen more than a collective 90 minutes worth of the show.

Mitchell82
October 4th, 2007, 02:44 PM
To be honest, the Nielsen system doesn't make much sense. They've acknowledged that it needs some work. I figure that since in 2009 the US is going all digital, they could get legitimate readings off of everyone's TV that consents to it.

But even then, I don't see Stargate ratings getting a huge bump. I mean SG-1 was one of my fav shows of all time (top 25 easily), but even I admit that it wasn't exactly the best written show around, and while not many people hate it, as some do Trek, many haven't seen more than a collective 90 minutes worth of the show.

I agree about the Nielsen system it really stinks. As to SGA's ratings it could easily improve if more of us Hardcore viewers were counted. The ratings in general are down so I can see it being renewed.

Sweetsong
October 4th, 2007, 04:20 PM
Didn't I read somewhere that the ratings for the previous season decided whether or not there would be a 5th season. Therefore the tail end of season 3 whose numbers are already in should have already sealed season fives' fate.

PG15
October 4th, 2007, 04:21 PM
That was changed to both end of season 3 and beginning of season 4 ratings.

pisces27
October 4th, 2007, 04:29 PM
I'm staying positive with fingers crossed for S5.

WingedPegasus
October 4th, 2007, 04:47 PM
I've seen 401,402, 404 and only Lifeline was a good episode. Rest could be ok, but I really doubt it

Then why are you even here?

Briangate78
October 4th, 2007, 05:26 PM
Didn't I read somewhere that the ratings for the previous season decided whether or not there would be a 5th season. Therefore the tail end of season 3 whose numbers are already in should have already sealed season fives' fate.


That was changed to both end of season 3 and beginning of season 4 ratings.

Actually because they made a major announcement about DVR being doubled in households , This season(as in all Fall premiere season networks). They may not even look or compare any of Season 3 to now. So basically, if SGA can keep viewers up in those key demographics then we should be fine for a 5th season. A few things to remember and this is all facts(please don't make me site sources, lol)

1. Sci-fi is one of the most DVR'd networks
2. SGA is one of the top shows DVR'd
3. Friday is the top day for DVR'ing
4. The 10pm slot is the most DVR'd time slot.

Now the networks are looking at something called a DVR Live + 7. Which means they tally all those number who DVR'd and watched the show throughout the week. Technology is changing, people are not watching live as much. I believe SGA's 4th season could not of started at a better time. The odds just went up big time.

the fifth man
October 4th, 2007, 06:54 PM
I agree about the Nielsen system it really stinks. As to SGA's ratings it could easily improve if more of us Hardcore viewers were counted. The ratings in general are down so I can see it being renewed.

The Nielsen rating system totally sucks. No doubt about it in my mind. There needs to definitely be a change.

As for ratings in general being down, I totally agree. Unless the ratings go lower, I don't see SGA being canceled by Sci-Fi. I think we'll get at least one more season out of Atlantis.

2ndgenerationalteran
October 4th, 2007, 06:56 PM
With Adrift only getting a 1.2 rating, I have a feeling this is the last season.

Didn't Paul Mullie say that the end of season 3 influenced the chances of a season 5?

Briangate78
October 4th, 2007, 07:14 PM
Didn't Paul Mullie say that the end of season 3 influenced the chances of a season 5?

That was before they made an announcement about DVR being a major impact on TV live viewership. So it's a whole new game. Different rules, different standings.

g.o.d
October 5th, 2007, 01:34 AM
Then why are you even here?

so I shouldn't be here because I don't like S4 of SGA, or what?

saberhagen83
October 5th, 2007, 01:48 AM
I agree about the Nielsen system it really stinks. As to SGA's ratings it could easily improve if more of us Hardcore viewers were counted. The ratings in general are down so I can see it being renewed.

Well I'd say that the Nielsen system could use some updating for sure. But there is no way to know if it would improve or not if every single person (or TV) in the US were counted properly. But it certainly would be interesting to know exactly how many people are watching the show, also recording it if they can't watch it live. But I am not too sure it would change the ratings all too much tbh.

But like you say, ratings are down in general on SciFi, also on other networks if I'm not misstaken. So obviously there is another factor to consider here, what it is might be hard to say. One can only blame illegal DLs so much. I think it's more like the music industry, they cry that CD sales are down but in fact the online sales are only going up and up. I think it's the same for TV in these new times. More and more people get it through the net, with the likes of Itunes. I think TV channels will have to take that into consideration soon as well. Cause doesn't MGM and NBC/SciFi recive money from those sales as well?

Mitchell82
October 5th, 2007, 09:34 AM
Actually because they made a major announcement about DVR being doubled in households , This season(as in all Fall premiere season networks). They may not even look or compare any of Season 3 to now. So basically, if SGA can keep viewers up in those key demographics then we should be fine for a 5th season. A few things to remember and this is all facts(please don't make me site sources, lol)

1. Sci-fi is one of the most DVR'd networks
2. SGA is one of the top shows DVR'd
3. Friday is the top day for DVR'ing
4. The 10pm slot is the most DVR'd time slot.

Now the networks are looking at something called a DVR Live + 7. Which means they tally all those number who DVR'd and watched the show throughout the week. Technology is changing, people are not watching live as much. I believe SGA's 4th season could not of started at a better time. The odds just went up big time.
I agree. Lets just hope our optimisim pays off.

Mitchell82
October 5th, 2007, 09:41 AM
Well I'd say that the Nielsen system could use some updating for sure. But there is no way to know if it would improve or not if every single person (or TV) in the US were counted properly. But it certainly would be interesting to know exactly how many people are watching the show, also recording it if they can't watch it live. But I am not too sure it would change the ratings all too much tbh.

But like you say, ratings are down in general on SciFi, also on other networks if I'm not misstaken. So obviously there is another factor to consider here, what it is might be hard to say. One can only blame illegal DLs so much. I think it's more like the music industry, they cry that CD sales are down but in fact the online sales are only going up and up. I think it's the same for TV in these new times. More and more people get it through the net, with the likes of Itunes. I think TV channels will have to take that into consideration soon as well. Cause doesn't MGM and NBC/SciFi recive money from those sales as well?

I agree it might be tough to decide how different the ratings would be if we all were counted and as you said it does need updating. All stations are down due to lack of good programing among other things DVR being one. As to MGM and NBC Universal (who owns scifi) getting money from legal downloads I don't know. Most likely MGM does but not sure about NBC universal. As to illegal downloads the only time I even conisder that as an issue was last years insane break.

Mitchell82
October 5th, 2007, 09:42 AM
The Nielsen rating system totally sucks. No doubt about it in my mind. There needs to definitely be a change.

As for ratings in general being down, I totally agree. Unless the ratings go lower, I don't see SGA being canceled by Sci-Fi. I think we'll get at least one more season out of Atlantis.

Agreed change needs to be implemented. I have no doubt we will at least get a fifth season and hopefully many more.

scififreak23
October 5th, 2007, 01:47 PM
Sc-fi got rid of stargate,dresden files, and bsg.The only major shows that they have left are eureka,dr.who, and atlantis.If they get rid of atlantis then they only have two popular shows left.They can't afford to get rid of atlantis.

gatechick
October 5th, 2007, 02:20 PM
I am optimistic that we will see more of Atlantis. I do wish that they would move the show to an earlier time slot. I think that may slightly help.

jenks
October 5th, 2007, 02:56 PM
Sc-fi got rid of stargate,dresden files, and bsg.The only major shows that they have left are eureka,dr.who, and atlantis.If they get rid of atlantis then they only have two popular shows left.They can't afford to get rid of atlantis.

Eureka probably earns them more money that Dr Who and Atlantis put together.

Briangate78
October 5th, 2007, 03:00 PM
Eureka probably earns them more money that Dr Who and Atlantis put together.

Jenks, do you work for Sci-fi? :p Also if SGA is 20 eps scoring decent figures in key demographics, you would think that is better than higher figured ratings in only 13 episodes.

jenks
October 5th, 2007, 03:02 PM
SGA and Dr Who gain Sci Fi advertising money only, whereas they can sell Eureka in any way they want.

Briangate78
October 5th, 2007, 03:09 PM
SGA and Dr Who gain Sci Fi advertising money only, whereas they can sell Eureka in any way they want.

Very true. So, MGM better sell SGA's 5th season at blue light special to Sci-fi and make it up on the itunes, Syndication, and DVD markets. :p

Mattathias2.0
October 5th, 2007, 03:19 PM
SGA and Dr Who gain Sci Fi advertising money only, whereas they can sell Eureka in any way they want.

I use to watch the classic Doctor Who when I was 7, with my dad. The ones with Tom Baker, although now I am getting into the entire old and new series to boot.

Lets see: William Hartnell, Patrick Toughton, Jon Pertwee, Tom Baker, Peter Davison, Colin Baker, Sylvestor McCoy, Paul McGann, Christopher Eccleston, and David Tennant.

Wraith_Boy
October 5th, 2007, 03:46 PM
Too bad that Sci-Fi cares only about commercials. I know, it´s basic of every television but without counting iTunes or internet players (lots of people even don´t have television any more!) is it pointless to count ratings. And most of people don´t have Nielsen box. This is unfair and stupid system.
But, I think that Sci-Fi should kick its own ass for letting some of their employee to get Adrift and Lifeline out and to make such stupid mistake like release Doppleganger isntead of Adrift. Another numbers of episodes or not, here we can see that the person who sent it to iTunes knows nothing about SGA and what people work with it.

Why exactly should Sci-Fi worry about how well it does in the internet or any other country outside the US!

They don't get any of that revenue, that all goes to MGM who own the franchise. Advertisers pay fees to advertise to viewers who watch the Sci-Fi channel. Therefore if people are watching Stargate for anywhere other than their channel, they don't get enough income for it. So why should they count it or care how popular it is on other mediums.

The only ones who care are MGM because it's their franchise & it's onky they who make money from it. Sci-Fi only gets income from companies who pay to advertise during Stargate. If less people are watching it live, then advertisers pay less, which does Sci-Fi out of income. Considering it's them who actually provide MGM with most of the budget to make Atlantis. Then they only care about people who watch it on their own channel.

If you were paying something like $10/$20mil a year to MGM to make Atlantis. Viewing figures were down. Advertising companies were paying you less to advertise during the commerical breaks of Stargate. That's all you get. While it does well on the internet & other countries which MGM gets all the revenue. Then would you give a toss, I sure as hell wouldn't!

The only way Skiffy would care about the internet is if they added it into the S4 deal in which they get the income from internet sales. If they do that, then they'll care & take it in consideration when deciding to renew for S5 or not.

However it's not down to Skiffy to do Atlantis good & keep viewers. It's down solely to the boys at 'Bridge Studios' who got Atlantis cancelled & soon Atlantis as well. They are ther ones MGM put in charge to make SG-1 & Atlantis, as well as soon to be 'Universe'. Therefore if they would make better shows, they wouldn't be losing viewers because fans wouldn't have reasons to tune out then!

Wraith_Boy
October 5th, 2007, 03:51 PM
Jenks, do you work for Sci-fi? :p Also if SGA is 20 eps scoring decent figures in key demographics, you would think that is better than higher figured ratings in only 13 episodes.

Other than the fact they own Eureka, so while Atlantis 20 eps obviously scorew higher viewers than a 13 ep show. The key is they get all the income from licensing it to all the many countries around the world. They get all the official merchandising fees, they get all the internet download sales. They get all the DVD boxset sales etc, etc! Whereas with Atlantis, they only get what advertisers pay during the commercial break when Stargate it on. When viewing figures dip or really drop, they pay less. So Sci-Fi makes less. Whiule MGM still makes a fortune from it every year regardless.

Briangate78
October 5th, 2007, 04:48 PM
Other than the fact they own Eureka, so while Atlantis 20 eps obviously scorew higher viewers than a 13 ep show. The key is they get all the income from licensing it to all the many countries around the world. They get all the official merchandising fees, they get all the internet download sales. They get all the DVD boxset sales etc, etc! Whereas with Atlantis, they only get what advertisers pay during the commercial break when Stargate it on. When viewing figures dip or really drop, they pay less. So Sci-Fi makes less. Whiule MGM still makes a fortune from it every year regardless.

Well Eureka is not the issue but what does the network air for the other 39 weeks of the year? BSG is ending next season. PKJ, TDF, and SG-1 have been cancelled. Flash Gordon and Dr. Who average below the network average. Ghost Hunters is only on for a short period of time. After all Sci-fi's new series have either tanked or are tanking. You would think they would go with the experience and what still attracts a decent fan base. Are they ready to lose around 2 million viewers? Which are in their key demographics that attract advertisers? I don't know, but this is Sci-fi we are talking about.

cavalierlwt
October 5th, 2007, 05:26 PM
I'll play the broken record here; I honestly believe that if we still had SG-1, and SciFi ran it's friday lineup of SG-1, SGA, then BSG that the ratings would be so much better. It's one of those situations where the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts. Those three together are such a great combo that you make a night of it, skip the DVR.

jenks
October 5th, 2007, 05:35 PM
The ratings would be better, but would they be making more money?

Lord batchi ball
October 5th, 2007, 05:39 PM
Well Eureka is not the issue but what does the network air for the other 39 weeks of the year? BSG is ending next season. PKJ, TDF, and SG-1 have been cancelled. Flash Gordon and Dr. Who average below the network average. Ghost Hunters is only on for a short period of time. After all Sci-fi's new series have either tanked or are tanking. You would think they would go with the experience and what still attracts a decent fan base. Are they ready to lose around 2 million viewers? Which are in their key demographics that attract advertisers? I don't know, but this is Sci-fi we are talking about.

What Sci FI needs is............SpongeBob in Space!!!!:D:D:D

cavalierlwt
October 5th, 2007, 05:47 PM
Tough to say where the break-even point is. I gotta think the show is doing at least ok at 1.5-1.6 , anything above is probably gravy. SciFi is just starting to be seen in HD, and that can give a slight boost too--eventually. Right now, I believe it's just DirecTV, soon it will be Dish and Cable.

AutumnDream
October 5th, 2007, 07:36 PM
MGM should fork over some of that revenue to sci-fi to make up for the lower ratings. I rather doubt they'd cease to profit, and having Atlantis on the air for more seasons means they get to continue milking the DVD and merchandise sales for cash. It would be better than not having it at all, I imagine.

jenks
October 5th, 2007, 07:41 PM
It probably would, but what sort of message does that send?

Vala_M
October 6th, 2007, 05:33 AM
Yes, the rating system is unreliable. Plus, the viewing demographics are not distributed evently, you could miss 10 houses that watch Atlantis but not one that watches sports programs or things like that.

What is the big thing with recording it to watch later? I hate that, the only way I resort to that is if there is a vacation planned and there's no way I can watch it other than that. I like watching it live and I don't know about anyone else but I feel like I'm among the first to watch it when I do.

Vala,

Briangate78
October 6th, 2007, 05:42 AM
Yes, the rating system is unreliable. Plus, the viewing demographics are not distributed evently, you could miss 10 houses that watch Atlantis but not one that watches sports programs or things like that.

What is the big thing with recording it to watch later? I hate that, the only way I resort to that is if there is a vacation planned and there's no way I can watch it other than that. I like watching it live and I don't know about anyone else but I feel like I'm among the first to watch it when I do.

Vala,

DVR is now a major factor in households. The second half of Season 3 being a little lower was most likely people DVR'ing the show. Joe M said the DVR makes a few tenths of a rating point difference. Adrift could of been a 1.4 or 1.5 once they added in the DVR numbers.

TennisMennis
July 31st, 2010, 08:01 AM
With Adrift only getting a 1.2 rating, I have a feeling this is the last season.

I'm surprised in hearing that Adrift only got a 1.2. Where are all the SciFi fans? Don't they know quality TV programming when it's right under their noses? Very disappointing to me. Oh well, I'm grateful for all these great years from SG1 and SGA and also SGU, which I haven't seen yet (DVD in the mail).

TennisMennis
July 31st, 2010, 08:03 AM
bye SGA, it was a great year with season 1. I won't miss you

Are you being sarcastic here? How can you say you won't miss SGA? Care to explain yourself? I'll be waiting.

jelgate
July 31st, 2010, 09:23 AM
Are you being sarcastic here? How can you say you won't miss SGA? Care to explain yourself? I'll be waiting.
He has disliked SGA since The Siege has ended. One thing you'll learn on the forum is that their are many people who post who don't like the direction of the show and some people who hate the show all together