S10: Critique & Contemplation

[scifithinker]

TRNT

Spoiler:

I can't buy that Landry just decided to let her go, but I liked the episode up to that point. In all fairness, I was wearing my Sam-glasses, which are a decidedly strong shade of rose.

[ReganX]

Oh, (German word for poop) Taht's what's on SGA this week? Well, do I want to gouge out the eyes? Not tonight.

I really with TRNT had been paced better.

Spoiler:

AT did a great job again though. Coulda done without Mitchell. Jack in there woulda been cool. Didn't miss Action Jackson at all.

suse

Spoiler:

I found that it was more like I didn't even notice that he wasn't there; if I hadn't known in advance that four episodes were to be blessedly Jackson-free, I don't know if I even would have fully registered that he wasn't there.

[Zoser]

In this mornings Philadelphia Inquirer
"Heroes returned to the air this week - with nearly 14 % fewer viewers than when it left for a 7 week hiatus. Can we all agree that the networks programming strategy has failed miserably?...
The only problem is that a large portion of their audiences wandered off in the interim. So I'm printing up a bumper sticker for all the TV honchos as a helpful reminder: Out of Sight, Out of Mind"

Our drop was more precipitous but we are not alone.

[Gatetrixer]

If I remember correctly, MS appeard in these eps in S6:

Abyss: 1.5
The Changeling: 1.7
Full Circle: 1.8

Nothing spectacular there. Most of the episodes that season (at least half) scored 1.7-1.9 in ratings, although yes it did have a few 1.4 or so as well. So that pretty much says that MS doesn't do that much for ratings. I think it's a lot more to do with other programing, lack of interest and real life stuff that really do affect the ratings.

I'd forgotten his glowy stuff in Full Circle. I enjoyed both Abyss and the Changeling--not Full Circle, which I supposed got a bit higher rating because of the position it was in. Of course, I was not watching SG at the time they first ran, so I don't know the thinking but Abyss being so Jack heavy you would have thought it would have higher ratings, at least if RDA/Jack was thought of as the draw(even with the torture stuff). I consider it an excellent episode.

[ReganX]

I'd forgotten his glowy stuff in Full Circle. I enjoyed both Abyss and the Changeling--not Full Circle, which I supposed got a bit higher rating because of the position it was in. Of course, I was not watching SG at the time they first ran, so I don't know the thinking but Abyss being so Jack heavy you would have thought it would have higher ratings, at least if RDA/Jack was thought of as the draw(even with the torture stuff). I consider it an excellent episode.

Depends on how it was advertised. Was it advertised as a Jack-centered episode or as the return of Daniel? A Jack-centered episode can't be a draw as a Jack-centered episode if nobody knows that it's going to be a Jack-centered episode.

Advertising can be pretty misleading.

[smurf]

In this mornings Philadelphia Inquirer
"Heroes returned to the air this week - with nearly 14 % fewer viewers than when it left for a 7 week hiatus. Can we all agree that the networks programming strategy has failed miserably?...
The only problem is that a large portion of their audiences wandered off in the interim. So I'm printing up a bumper sticker for all the TV honchos as a helpful reminder: Out of Sight, Out of Mind"

Our drop was more precipitous but we are not alone.

The difference between Heroes' drop and SG's drop was that everyone knew SG was back on, because it was (relatively) fine the week it came back. It was the week after when the drop happened.
I don't think "Out of Sight, Out of Mind" applies in SG's case.

Also it seems like the 7 week hiatus was necessary in Heroes' case, because from the online commentaries it sounded like the episodes being aired were catching up fast with the current production schedule.

[Mandysg1]

Depends on how it was advertised. Was it advertised as a Jack-centered episode or as the return of Daniel? A Jack-centered episode can't be a draw as a Jack-centered episode if nobody knows that it's going to be a Jack-centered episode.

Advertising can be pretty misleading.

IIRC, I beleive it was advertised as Daniel returning.

[ParadoxRealities]

IIRC, I beleive it was advertised as Daniel returning.

that's what i recall as well.

[Skydiver]

in the case of heroes there's also the network manipulating it so that the seasaon ender airs during sweeps...which started last thursday

this will also be used as an excuse for sg1 and sga's poor ratings

in them holding the shows back until now, they are gonna spend the next 3-4 fridays competing against the network's heaviest hitters...since may sweeps set the ad rates until oct/nov, now is when the most gimicks are aired

babies born, people married, people killed, etc

thus, instead of competing against strong re-runs, the shows will be competing against very strong first run season finales

it'll be used as an excuse for the dwindling ratings, and not totally a false one. just another example of how silly skiffy's decision was to hold the airings back. not only are we the last to receive the new eps (of the us, uk and canada) but we're also getting them when they're competing against season finales

I doubt that the ratings will get any better until those last few eps in june when they're again competing against re-runs

[scifithinker]

I thought I had read that SciFi held the two Stargate shows back so that they could be as competitive as possible during ratings because Stargate has been so reliable in ratings compared to its other shows?

(At this time I would like to point out that I have made no editorial comment in conjunction with this statement even though the possibilities are rife. I am working very hard to exercise self-restraint because it actually is a serious question.)

[Jackie]

I seem to recall Mark Stern's reasoning for setting air dates back was to--in some magical way--have better rating for skiffy and make it so they could set new ad rates in oct.

Now, if that was the real reason behind the move--then I would call for the chief officer's resignation. That would make no sense because sweeps effects all the networks.

If his reasoning was to actually kill off the stargate series and at the same time--save thier precious BSG. I would call it a conspiracy.

[smurf]

It was a fairly sensible decision for Sci Fi because Stargate was one of their highest rating shows. It's the show which made Skiffy what it is. I'm sure they honestly thought that the shows had levelled off (SGA had), and a run of 1.5's or so would be in the bag.

I think they'd be horrified if there was regular occurrence of 1.1/1.2 going into sweep season.
Then again it might have been more sensible to start the 2nd half a bit earlier so they could catch the ratings for the last episode(s).

Might be time to swap in some Eureka reruns.

[Skydiver]

well, if they were wanting better sweeps ratings - although i always thought that cable didn't count in sweeps, but i could be wrong - then i would think that they'd want the last 4 eps of the season to be in may...the ones that typically perform better - final 4 compared to the middle ones - instead of having the finale air in june, when it no longer matters

i would think that skiffy would have taken advantage of thier cross promotion and spammed ads for sg1 and atl all over nbc, usa and the others...touting the series finale to air in may sweeps instead of after

[ChevronSeven]

I seem to recall Mark Stern's reasoning for setting air dates back was to--in some magical way--have better rating for skiffy and make it so they could set new ad rates in oct.

Now, if that was the real reason behind the move--then I would call for the chief officer's resignation. That would make no sense because sweeps effects all the networks.

If his reasoning was to actually kill off the stargate series and at the same time--save thier precious BSG. I would call it a conspiracy.

You've got to understand the way NBC (who own SciFi) treats its executives. The more they screw up, the higher they get promoted. It worked for Jeff Zucker.

[Jackie]

You've got to understand the way NBC (who own SciFi) treats its executives. The more they screw up, the higher they get promoted. It worked for Jeff Zucker.

Yup, just like Kodak and Xerox too!