Ratings slip in wake of '200' promotion

[Cameron Mitchel]

That doesn't make sense. Why would the SFC even want to "control the numbers"? They probably have a minimum rating they guarenteed the advertisers. That would mean the SFC would lose money if they have to give away makeup spots on other shows because the weekly ratings missed the mark. If they try to inflate or deflate the numbers, everybody would know and they would get a black eye for doing so.

How would the SFC manipulate the numbers anyways? The Nielsen ratings is an independent service and they want to protect their integrity and report the data they collect.

Why would the SFC have to make room? Eureka and ECW are on a different night. It's not like one of those shows is replacing SG1 on SciFi Friday. Now that would be a different story. Doubt the SFC would move either show from Tuesday. They have been trying to create a new night of original programming for years. Besides WWE Friday Night SmackDown is on UPN Friday night at 8pm and WWE doesn't want any of their sister wrestling programs on the same night and/or airing at the same time.

Ratings. Popularity. Stated already. And for what Smurf said about the Nielsen thing in response to what I said: It still doesn't make it fair. Doesnt have to be in my favor. But it still isnt fair. And It seems to me that youre (smurf) one of the ones who doesnt like the new seasons.

[full.infinity]

Is it only fair when it's in your favor?
You know, it's just as likely if the Neilsens counted everyone that the numbers could be lower.

No, it was unfair even when Stargate was getting good ratings. It's been unfair at least since the first year that American Idol topped the ratings.

[ShadowMaat]

And I never said that everything in the world has to make sense to me...

Yes, but the ratings have been adjusted to compensate for the loss of viewers.

Originally posted by Cameron Mitchell
I cant believe you cuz it doesnt make since. Ratings has nothing to do with people dissatisfied with the show.

You're saying you can't believe smurf because it doesn't make sense to you. My point is that things don't have to make sense in order to be true.

I was also attempting to put things in perspective. Compared to all the troubles in the world, the cancellation of a cable TV show falls kinda short on the list of "This is important."

And if I don't know why the show was cancelled, neither do you.

[Agent_Dark]

Uh, not EVERYBODY has this Nielsen thing. So its not a fair rating system.

There's this mathematical thing called 'Statistics'. Maybe you've heard of it. Anyway, it lets you predict fairly accurately statistics across a large population based off a much smaller sample size. Take a Statistics course (High school level maths maybe?) and you'll find out.

[kirmit]

something doesn't seem right to me. No offence to any Atlantis fans but 'Counterstrike' looked like and was the better episode, you could tell from the previews. So it's a bit strange how the show they're keeping is always that 0.1% ahead of the one they're cancelling, it seems too iffy to me that Atlantis is always only that 0.1% ahead, surely if it was the better show (which i personally dont think it is) it would get more than that ahead of sg-1. I really think scifi are trying to kill stargate all together to bring their crappy wrestling shows in, with Atlantis only bein that tiny percent ahead of sg-1 it won't be long til it's cancelled aswell, which is exactly what scifi want.

[Ltcolshepjumper]

My main issue with Scifi is the fact that they didn't give a reason to why they cancelled the show.

[ShadowMaat]

Uh, first hint that there is something they aren't telling us is that they never said the cancellation was because of ratings.

Statement: Stargate has been cancelled.
Statement: The ratings are dropping because not as many people are watching.

Whether the two are "connected" is kinda beside the point. They're two separate statements.

But you know what? I give up. Y'all go on being hysterical and spouting your comforting little conspiracy theories. If that's what helps you make sense of the big, bad world, fine.

I'll go back to some of the more rational (or at least more fun) parts of the board and leave you all to your spouting.

[Ltcolshepjumper]

I just want an official reason besides " We felt like it." Until then I will assume that 1. They are tired of the show, 2. They want to put other shows in the spotlight, or 3. NBC wants more room for more of their none scifi shows ( hence ECW).

[Cameron Mitchel]

Statement: Stargate has been cancelled.
Statement: The ratings are dropping because not as many people are watching.

Whether the two are "connected" is kinda beside the point. They're two separate statements.

But you know what? I give up. Y'all go on being hysterical and spouting your comforting little conspiracy theories. If that's what helps you make sense of the big, bad world, fine.

I'll go back to some of the more rational (or at least more fun) parts of the board and leave you all to your spouting.

Listen, before we drop it, we still dont know the exact reason, and even every reason, that ratings are low, so you cant make a statement like that. Ok, the fact is, we ALL dont know, we just have speculations, Im not criticizing you for what you believe, but what others said earlier was correct: We dont know for sure what the reasoning is for anything, ratings, cancellation, etc. Forgive me if anything I said was offensive.

[Cameron Mitchel]

something doesn't seem right to me. No offence to any Atlantis fans but 'Counterstrike' looked like and was the better episode, you could tell from the previews. So it's a bit strange how the show they're keeping is always that 0.1% ahead of the one they're cancelling, it seems too iffy to me that Atlantis is always only that 0.1% ahead, surely if it was the better show (which i personally dont think it is) it would get more than that ahead of sg-1. I really think scifi are trying to kill stargate all together to bring their crappy wrestling shows in, with Atlantis only bein that tiny percent ahead of sg-1 it won't be long til it's cancelled aswell, which is exactly what scifi want.

I agree.

[Cameron Mitchel]

There's this mathematical thing called 'Statistics'. Maybe you've heard of it. Anyway, it lets you predict fairly accurately statistics across a large population based off a much smaller sample size. Take a Statistics course (High school level maths maybe?) and you'll find out.

Well, I know Carter fans/Mitchell haters dont like the show the way it is because of one character-Mitchell.

[Konijn]

Yeah, I know MGM doesn't want SG-1 cancelled, they appear to be doing everything they can to keep it on TV.

Has anyone thought what would happen to SGA in season 4 if MGM doesn't get a new host for SG-1 or get into an even bigger feude with Sci-Fi ?

Asin, purposely making the script/show bad because they want Sci-Fi to loose even more ratings and couldn't care less if SGA was cancelled aswell?

In any event, i'm 100% sure there will more SG-1 in some form, most likely a Movie.

[smurf]

No, it was unfair even when Stargate was getting good ratings. It's been unfair at least since the first year that American Idol topped the ratings.

Well, I must have had my ear plugs in, because I'm pretty sure I didn't hear anyone here moaning about it then.

[Jonzey]

It's simple really, though not many antis would be willing to accept it because it would mean it's not about the quality of the show...

Fact 1: Monk, USA Network's most popular show, now airs opposite SG-1.
Fact 2: SG-1's ratings have slipped this year.
Fact 3: ''200'' recorded the highest ratings this season for SG-1.
Fact 4: Monk's usually stable ratings dipped significantly opposite 200.
Fact 5: This week was Monk's season finale, traditionally the episode with the highest ratings.
Fact 6: SG-1's ratings dipped again opposite this episode.

Conclusion: The next 3 episodes of this half of the season do not air against any significant competition (that I'm aware of), so it's likely that the ratings will go back up.

[Callista]

This is just a question regarding ratings: Someone earlier said "Counterstrike" was a really good episode and so it didn't seem right that the rating were lower.
My question is: Does it matter if an individual episode is good or not as far as ratings are concerned?
I know they have the ability to measure if people are watching the teaser and then changing the channel or watching the first 15 minutes and then getting bored and changing the channel, but how does that translate into the ratings? If that's what is happening, then the quality of the individual episode would matter in the ratings. However, if it's a matter of people not tuning in in the first place, then it would seem it's more a matter of publicity/advertising (of which the 200th episode got tons more and therefore would naturally get higher ratings) or it might have more to do with how much people liked the previous episode (which I suppose would imply people didn't like the 200th episode that much or only watched it out of curiosity due to all the hype). Or, as Jonzey stated above, the competition could be different from week to week.
I would think the ratings reflect the overall quality or popularity of a show rather than individual episodes (with the exception of a special one like "200"). The casual viewer doesn't come on-line and won't know if something special is happening in advance of an episode unless it is heavily advertised in other media so the ratings wouldn't be affected much. I would assume that most of the viewers fall into either the casual grouping or people who watch faithfully but never come on-line to check up on the show. (Please correct me if I'm wrong about that.)
Sorry, my question kind of turned into an exposition.