Ratings slip in wake of '200' promotion

[Cameron Mitchel]

I haven't read every post in this thread, but wasn't Counterstrike on up against the season finale of Monk? A 1.5 would be pretty good if that happened.

Why did USA move Monk against SG1 when both USA and SciFi are run by Bonnie Hammer?

Cuz Stargate isnt a USA or SciFi original series even though they say it is.

[ParadoxRealities]

Assumptions, blah blah blah.

sorry...how's that an assumption?

Besides being completely irrelevent, this statement made me lose faith in humanity for about the 17,684th time since I started using Internet forums.

i think you missed the point here. i think it was supposed to be "things happen even if you don't understand them".

Ironic that you're accusing everyone of being a conspiracy theorist, when it's all just in your head. Nobody is saying there's a conspiracy (at least not on this forum), all people are saying is that there's more going on than we are being told, which is true no matter how you look at it.

actually, there are quite a few. in fact, since this thread is about "Now I believe that SciFi is controlling the ratings."/"questioning SciFi's reason for canceling the show", and with the definition of conspiracy being "an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot." this seems to be one of them.

Again with the assumptions. For the first time I do not watch the shows live, but I do not have a choice, because I have commitments every Friday night until November, but I still set my VCR and watch the show late that night or the next day. There are many people with the same problem who either record the episodes or download them off of iTunes. Just because not as many people watch the show live doesn't mean they don't watch it at all.

i think the original statement was meant to counter the "Scifi is controlling the ratings" accusation. add the word "live", if you are so inclinded. though i think the TiVoed number is going down as well.

[MediaSavant]

I don't think the declines in ratings compared to last year are just because of Monk. I've been looking very carefully at the schedules the Stargates faced last year vs. the schedules it's up against this year.

A lot of the ratings drop started in the winter.

There are three major differences compared to last summer:

UPN replace what used to be a low-rated movie with high-rated WWE wrestling. That started last winter. And there are some casual viewers who will choose wrestling over a scifi show.

Last winter, CBS's schedule improved greatly in the ratings compared to what it used to run. This Summer, they put The Unit in at 9PM. The Unit is a male-appeal, military-heavy show. It has been performing better than what CBS ran last year. You have to believe that if some guys are looking for a military-flavored show, they will choose a show about the military fighting terrorists(a real life threat) vs. one about the military fighting funny looking aliens.

The third change. of course, is Monk. I certainly think Monk is a factor, but it isn't the only factor.

The real problem isn't that SG-1 got competition, it's that it didn't hold up well against competition. It makes one wonder if it would have always had lower ratings if the other networks had put anything more popular against it.

[Cameron Mitchel]

I don't think the declines in ratings compared to last year are just because of Monk. I've been looking very carefully at the schedules the Stargates faced last year vs. the schedules it's up against this year.

A lot of the ratings drop started in the winter.

There are three major differences compared to last summer:

UPN replace what used to be a low-rated movie with high-rated WWE wrestling. That started last winter. And there are some casual viewers who will choose wrestling over a scifi show.

Last winter, CBS's schedule improved greatly in the ratings compared to what it used to run. This Summer, they put The Unit in at 9PM. The Unit is a male-appeal, military-heavy show. It has been performing better than what CBS ran last year. You have to believe that if some guys are looking for a military-flavored show, they will choose a show about the military fighting terrorists(a real life threat) vs. one about the military fighting funny looking aliens.

The third change. of course, is Monk. I certainly think Monk is a factor, but it isn't the only factor.

The real problem isn't that SG-1 got competition, it's that it didn't hold up well against competition. It makes one wonder if it would have always had lower ratings if the other networks had put anything more popular against it.

Yes, that and advertisements. I believe that the loosing fans was one of the factors but I believe that is very small compared to the other factors.

[Cameron Mitchel]

sorry...how's that an assumption?
i think you missed the point here. i think it was supposed to be "things happen even if you don't understand them".actually, there are quite a few. in fact, since this thread is about "Now I believe that SciFi is controlling the ratings."/"questioning SciFi's reason for canceling the show", and with the definition of conspiracy being "an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot." this seems to be one of them.i think the original statement was meant to counter the "Scifi is controlling the ratings" accusation. add the word "live", if you are so inclinded. though i think the TiVoed number is going down as well.

I realize that mistake. Why keep bringing it up. This thread is to discuss what we believe about what affected the cancellation and ratings. But when it comes to cancellation, it was SciFi's decision alone that cancelled the show. And from the reports they never said it was because of the ratings. They said they felt like it was the right time. Not a real good reason to me. that's why I think they want their shows in there. And they might, if the show stays cancelled, move Eureka or ECW to Stargate SG-1's time slot. And just realize that it's only a matter of time before they try to kick Stargate Atlantis out. And another thing: I dont understand why SciFi didnt want MGM to have it on another channel. I dont understand. Why form the contract on that agreement in the first place? Did they think that Stargate could live on forever on SciFi? That was MGM's big mistake.

[MediaSavant]

I dont understand why SciFi didnt want MGM to have it on another channel. I dont understand. Why form the contract on that agreement in the first place? Did they think that Stargate could live on forever on SciFi? That was MGM's big mistake.

I do understand why SciFi would want that in the contract. What I don't understand is why MGM agreed to it.

Unless this is all standard stuff.

[ToasterOnFire]

Agreed, especially considering how MGM is well aware that SG1 has already moved networks once.

I'm curious now whether there was such a clause in the original Showtime/MGM agreement and it just got bought out/waived or whether there wasn't and such exclusivity clauses are newer or rarer.

[smurf]

I have a feeling that it is probably now a standard clause in contracts.
Looking at how television has evolved in the last few years with the increase in the take up of cable, what differentiates your channel from the rest is the shows you air. Smaller broadcasters, such as Sci Fi, become heavily linked to it's biggest shows so the last thing you need is to have the "brand" you've built up stolen/undercutted by a rival network.
Why MGM would have signed it, I would say, is because they look at the bigger picture. Stargate is a franchise as far as they are concerned, and SG-1 is old, so I doubt it matters greatly to them if SG-1 is put to bed as long as they can still milk the Stargate idea.

[Pitry]

Also, let's be realistic. How likely is another network to buy such an old show, even if the clause is there since like, season 6? MGM must have figured that out, too.

I wonder, tho, with the quite early cancellation, when was this clause netered.