The Cam and Vala discussion thread

[Crow T. Robot]

Did you see the ads for SG-1 on ANOTHER channel and not SciFi only? How do you expect the casual viewers to even know the show is on TV?

Let’s see...

What sites mentioned SG-1’s summer opener?

Zapit, TV Guide both the magazine and the website, Yahoo (Who post Zapit’s what to watch) the channel listing that comes with my local newspaper.

Among many others..

[RealmOfX]

Did you see the ads for SG-1 on ANOTHER channel and not SciFi only? How do you expect the casual viewers to even know the show is on TV?

When has Stargate ever been advertised on other channels?

[Farscapefan]

Let’s see...

What sites mentioned SG-1’s summer opener?

Zapit, TV Guide both the magazine and the website, Yahoo (Who post Zapit’s what to watch) the channel listing that comes with my local newspaper.

Among many others..

My question was about TV channel (one of NBC's "family").

[Crow T. Robot]

My question was about TV channel (one of NBC's "family").

Huh? I’m not following this line of thought at all.

I thought your point was that no one knew that SG-1 had started its season 10 run because of lack of promotion and/or advertising. I pointed out that it was highlighted in many magazines and websites.

So word was out there. The viewers just didn’t show up.

[Descent]

When has Stargate ever been advertised on other channels?

Never as far as I know. Though I do remember commercials for the "new slim sets" being all over the place but yet Season 10 wasn't advertised that way.

IMO, Sci-Fi is doing a crappy job advertising but I definately don't think thats why the show "died".

[smurf]

Fantastic? *looks over S6 ratings* No, I wouldn't really call them fantastic. "Good" would be the right word though and the fact that SG-1 stood alone then is a valid point.

That was fantastic at the time for Sci Fi - it had gained the channel's highest ratings so far. One could argue that the channel built itself upon the ratings for Stargate: SG-1 season 6.


As for the slim sets being advertised; that is an entirely separate issue and has nothing to do with Sci Fi, since it is merchandise which is the remit of MGM/Sony.

[smurf]

Huh? I’m not following this line of thought at all.

I thought your point was that no one knew that SG-1 had started its season 10 run because of lack of promotion and/or advertising. I pointed out that it was highlighted in many magazines and websites.

So word was out there. The viewers just didn’t show up.

You'd have thought that after missing the first episode (if people did through lack of advertising) if they had wanted to watch the show they'd have remembered to watch it.
It's not as if it's moved from Friday, the day of the week it's been on since season 6. And it starts in July as well... like every other year.


Incidentally, I still haven't voted in the poll. Too bad I can't pick 2 and 3.
The writing has been poor for me for a while, but it was the badly written characters which finally did the dirty deed - they just couldn't hide the bad writing.

[ReganX]

Yup, if SciFi didn't plan to destroy it from the start of season 10 with the crappy and ****ty line up on Friday's night.

Why would the Sci-Fi channel set out to destroy a successful show?

In Season Eight, the show was doing very well ratings-wise and, while there was a significant drop as Season Nine progressed, it was still doing fairly respectably.

Why would the Sci-Fi channel deliberately try to destroy Season Ten? Why would it be in their best interests to do so? It is their record breaking season, so it would stand to reason that they would want it to do well ratings-wise. For one thing, I imagine that a show doing well is going to be more attractive to prospective advertisers.

Do you think that they have been planning that Stargate would end when Season Ten did from the time they agreed to a ninth and tenth season?

I thought that TPTB believed that the show would continue to an eleventh season if Season Ten performed well in the ratings. The contracts for a potential Season Eleven were signed, so the option was clearly left open.

[ReganX]

A show that can't hold casual viewers without "help" from another one isn't a strong one in the first place.

The argument that the Friday line-up is that significant just won't run. If a show depends so much on lead-in etc., i.e. isn't strong enought to stand alone, then it's not a ratings-winner in the first place.

Exactly.

If the only way the show can do well is by having another show help it, then why would the Sci-Fi channel want to keep paying for it?

The same applies to the argument that competition is causing the low ratings - why pay what I'm sure is a pretty penny for the show if it can't hold its own against competition?

[ReganX]

Did you see the ads for SG-1 on ANOTHER channel and not SciFi only? How do you expect the casual viewers to even know the show is on TV?

TV guides, word of mouth, magazines, the internet...

I've never set foot in the US and I know when it's on. It stands to reason that a casual viewer could also find out.

If, however, they no longer want to watch the show and haven't bothered checking when its on, that's another story.

[Mandysg1]

TV guides, word of mouth, magazines, the internet...

I've never set foot in the US and I know when it's on. It stands to reason that a casual viewer could also find out.

If, however, they no longer want to watch the show and haven't bothered checking when its on, that's another story.

You know, in all the years SG has been on air, I don't ever recall it being advertised on another network. I believe it started out at 9:00 on SciFi and always on Fridays. So when it changed to 8:00 it was the lead in show and didn't have a lead in show and did well. So changing back to 9:00 on Friday, doesn't make it difficult to find, people just didn't want to watch it.

[Skydiver]

as to season 6's ratings, hey they were good enough for s7 and atlantis...and good enough that, when farscape was negotiating, farscape 'lost' because stargate's ratings were so much better that skiffy went with stargate over farscape

and i agree, if a show can't stand 'on its own' it's not a strong show.

and the whole 'lack of promtion, lack of strong lead-in, lack of advertising' is just a freebie for those involved with the show to escape responsibility for killing it.

as long as the blame is kept on nebulous concepts, no one actually has to take responsibilty for the actions and decisions they've made

[LaCroix]

Did you see the ads for SG-1 on ANOTHER channel and not SciFi only? How do you expect the casual viewers to even know the show is on TV?

I know this is going to sound a little off-beat, from someone who remembers when the show was on Showtime.

But when the show started on Showtime. I seem to recall there was very little advertisment of the program itself except on that channel. This was also back when there was only one Showtime channel, not as it is today with
Showetime 1, 2 ,5, or 20.

The only exposure it had on broadcast television in the States was when RDA made the rounds of a few talk shows. I think I've said this before, I know people who've ordered one of the movie channels for one season, then cancel when that season is done. Which maybe a better way of showing viewership (IMHO).

But in the end it doesn't answer the question. I agree with ReganX comments

TV guides, word of mouth, magazines, the internet...

I've never set foot in the US and I know when it's on. It stands to reason that a casual viewer could also find out.

If, however, they no longer want to watch the show and haven't bothered checking when its on, that's another story.

TV Guide, newspaper TV listings, and on screen listings provided from your cable/sat. service are there. If one is interested, one has a few ways of finding out when it's on.

As always, JMHO. YMMV

[Skydiver]

back in the showtime days it was a HUGE deal just to have a singluar print at in tv guide.

the show was advertised once a year

[Skydiver]

we also had no dvd's.

region 1 eventually got season 1, but region 2 had a compilation of a few of s1 and then it started with season 2 on

the merchandise was only on the mgm site and was largely comprised of t-shirts, hats, a jacket and a dashboard compass

there were no books, no magazines and certainly no conventions (2000 was the first con on north american soil)

and it did just fine