<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for TVbytheNumbers</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/TVbytheNumbers/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 23:31:37 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: The Big Idea Shelved - mediabistro.com: TVNewser</title><link>http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnbc/the_big_idea_shelved_102425.asp#comment-4176761</link><description>with a scratch rate of around 40% this year, I bet the "hiatus" will be indefinite</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnbc/the_big_idea_shelved_102425.asp</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 23:31:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Big Idea Shelved - mediabistro.com: TVNewser</title><link>http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnbc/the_big_idea_shelved_102425.asp#comment-4168984</link><description>Well to be fair, CNBC put "On the Money" on hiatus last year before bringing it back this year. So, perhaps, all is not lost for the dozens of Donny Deutsch viewers...</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnbc/the_big_idea_shelved_102425.asp</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:50:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Big Idea Shelved - mediabistro.com: TVNewser</title><link>http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnbc/the_big_idea_shelved_102425.asp#comment-4168706</link><description>Networks almost never use the word "cancelled", so that distinction is meaningless. Looking at past behavior, once  show is put on "hiatus" it's almost certainly dead.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:32:08 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 60 Minutes Most-Watched Program Last Week - mediabistro.com: TVNewser</title><link>http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cbs/60_minutes_mostwatched_program_last_week_100302.asp#comment-3682809</link><description>Thanks BIll I'll add an update.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cbs/60_minutes_mostwatched_program_last_week_100302.asp</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:15:29 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 60 Minutes Most-Watched Program Last Week - mediabistro.com: TVNewser</title><link>http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cbs/60_minutes_mostwatched_program_last_week_100302.asp#comment-3682571</link><description>Steve, while it might have been the top-rated program in all broadcast *prime-time* television, I'd wager that one or more Sunday afternoon NFL game national broadcasts topped it. We don't see last weeks non-prime-time sports numbers until Friday, but I will follow up if I remember.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:04:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: O&amp;#8217;Reilly vs. Olbermann Through Thursday, August 28</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/29/oreilly-vs-olbermann-through-thursday-august-28/4841#comment-1931172</link><description>Ratings or no ratings, there comes a time when a network cuts it's losses. AKA Rosie and ABC. I believe Keith is about to melt down.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">StephenMartin</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 20:40:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: O&amp;#8217;Reilly vs. Olbermann Through Thursday, August 28</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/29/oreilly-vs-olbermann-through-thursday-august-28/4841#comment-1929194</link><description>My guess that Olbermann's rise was significantly tied to the high level of interest in the Democratic nomination race. I think he can maintain his current level through the election, but if Obama wins I think he's going to have trouble finding the level of targets he has over the recent past.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I think his level of ratings success can allow him a pretty wide latitude within (and outside) MSNBC, but if that success falls off the long knives may come out quickly.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 16:53:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Wimbledon Tennis Viewership, 1973-2008</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/07/04/wimbledon-tennis-viewership-1973-2008/4209#comment-1929154</link><description>The numbers are the average viewership across all telecasts for that year.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I don't have any information why the average viewership would have fallen so sharply in 1983.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 16:47:06 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: O&amp;#8217;Reilly vs. Olbermann Through Thursday, August 28</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/29/oreilly-vs-olbermann-through-thursday-august-28/4841#comment-1925222</link><description>Franz, about 80% of O'Reilly viewers are over 54 (2 million of 2.5 million). That is fairly typical of TV news viewers.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;About 60% of Olbermann viewers are over 54 (700k of 1.1 million). That is a low % for TV news.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And it's the 25-54 demo that makes the money for the networks.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 05:19:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Renew/Cancel Index, Our Predictor Of Show Futures</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800#comment-1924561</link><description>Journeyman is another one of those shows where the season average can be deceiving. It started out with 9 million and a 3.5 in the demo, but ended with 5 million and a 1.5.  Lipstick Jungle, on the other hand, started with 6 million and a 2.5 and stayed pretty steady. Also, you could argue that viewers just didn't find LJ because it aired during the strike when everything was on reruns and viewing was down on all the networks, so it has a chance to grow in the second season. You can't make the same argument for Journeyman.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 03:28:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: O&amp;#8217;Reilly vs. Olbermann Through Thursday, August 28</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/29/oreilly-vs-olbermann-through-thursday-august-28/4841#comment-1919817</link><description>Joe, we only started the site last fall and my detailed knowledge only goes back that far, but my understanding was that MSNBC was way behind its current position before they made many changes, among them getting Olbermann.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:35:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Renew/Cancel Index, Our Predictor Of Show Futures</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800#comment-1919418</link><description>Mike G., cost definitely plays a factor and we can do little but guess about it most of the time. Also, the networks have *far* more data than we do on which to base their decisions. My simple calculation worked out pretty well for backwards prediction purposes, but I have no illusion that the decision for the networks for those shows "on the bubble" is far from simple.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:01:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: First Night Democratic Convention Ratings Way Up Over 2004</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/26/first-night-democratic-convention-ratings-way-up-over-2004/4788#comment-1907148</link><description>Frank, they reflect the average number of viewers watching during the entire time period specified. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;For the graphic above there are two time periods: total day (defined as 6a-3a) and prime-time (8p-11p).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It is correct to say, for example, that on average 3.7 million people were watching CNN during the period from 8-11p Monday night.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 04:56:12 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: ABC 2008 Fall Schedule vs. 2007 Fall Schedule</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/05/13/abc-2008-fall-schedule-vs-2007-fall-schedule/3751#comment-1906299</link><description>Kathy, Women's Murder Club was cancelled, it's not coming back</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:28:32 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Weekly Top Cable Networks: August 18-24</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/26/weekly-top-cable-networks-august-18-24/4783#comment-1903184</link><description>MIKE, we always see the top 20 overall cable network data. Occasionally we see the top 31. Neither of those channels have ever been on either list in the past year.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:29:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: First Night Democratic Convention Ratings Way Up Over 2004</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/26/first-night-democratic-convention-ratings-way-up-over-2004/4788#comment-1889412</link><description>very well put bill, especially the last part about the larger fan base of right leaning viewers at fnc.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/26/first-night-democratic-convention-ratings-way-up-over-2004/4788</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:33:17 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Renew/Cancel Index, Our Predictor Of Show Futures</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800#comment-1889364</link><description>kcferret, the ratings are just statistical calculations done by Nielsen from their available data. Are they perfect? No. Are they the currently accepted standard for evaluating the audience of a TV show and therefore its revenue potential? Yes.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;As for all the variables you wrote about, I'm sure they were part of the factors considered by CBS programming management in evaluating whether to renew or cancel Moonlight.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:28:12 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Cable News Ratings for Tuesday, August 26</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/cable-news-ratings-for-tuesday-august-26/4810#comment-1878465</link><description>rss, We didn't get our regular ratings data for Monday, sadly. Only the aggregate ratings that we did post.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:42:38 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Renew/Cancel Index, Our Predictor Of Show Futures</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800#comment-1878173</link><description>Robert, we have no real data on the costs for shows, mostly TV industry rumors, but the story was at the end of the season Fox kept 'Til Death because of it's lower cost. It was specifically compared to Back to You which had very similar ratings (see above) but because of Kelsey Grammar and Patricia Heaton's salaries was said to be much more expensive. Again, it was all part of the rumor mill.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:22:36 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Renew/Cancel Index, Our Predictor Of Show Futures</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800#comment-1877970</link><description>Thanks Bill and Robert. I was just curious. It doesn't make much difference for the renew/cancel index (unless one show has a lot more reruns than any other on the network), but is does skew the total numbers for shows that show reruns vs those that don't (e.g. CSI vs. Lost).</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:08:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Renew/Cancel Index, Our Predictor Of Show Futures</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800#comment-1877720</link><description>I think you can scratch-out the word "likely" above...</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:52:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Renew/Cancel Index, Our Predictor Of Show Futures</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800#comment-1877706</link><description>Slight modification to Bill's disclaimer: includes any in-slot repeats or in-slot original episodes which were *not* designated as "special" which exempts from counting in the S-T-D averages.  All things considered, this ability to "game" the Nielsen numbers isn't abused very much.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:51:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Renew/Cancel Index, Our Predictor Of Show Futures</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800#comment-1877656</link><description>wopa, DH is likely one of the most valuable shows on TV from a revenue perspective.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:47:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Renew/Cancel Index, Our Predictor Of Show Futures</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800#comment-1877611</link><description>Holly, it was using the Nielsen STD numbers which *do* include in-slot repeats.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;They are the only STD numbers that we see.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:44:59 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Renew/Cancel Index, Our Predictor Of Show Futures</title><link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/27/the-renewcancel-index-our-predictor-of-show-futures/4800#comment-1875661</link><description>Chmarin, thanks, it's fixed. That was an error from May that I failed to correct in the original list.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TVbytheNumbers</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:18:14 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>