Season 6 ratings

[Hatshepsut]

Does anyone know what the ratings have been for the first few episodes of series 6?

I've heard one of T.P.T.B. quoted as saying the ratings are through the roof, then recently I read somewhere that they are down by sixty per cent on the Showtime ratings, which seems rather a large decrease...

They can't both be right!

Best wishes,
Hatshepsut - hoping the show doesn't get cancelled before 'The Abyss' is aired...
--

 

[star]

Hi!
I was released today or yesterday.
here:
http://www.gateworld.net/news/ratings.html#newsitem1025542683,96088




RATINGS: 'Redemption, Part 1'
MONDAY - JULY 1, 2002

''The Season Six premiere of Stargate SG-1 on The Sci-Fi Channel grabbed impressive numbers for the cable network, and was Sci-Fi's most-watched show for the first week of June! Sci Fi Wire reports that "Redemption, Part 1" earned a 1.8 household rating, representing more than 1.8 million homes.

Stargate's new companion show, Farscape, earned a 1.6 in the following hour -- it's best in over a year. (Farscape's all-time record in three seasons is a 1.7. Complete ratings for first-run episodes are available at FarscapeWorld.com.)

While the numbers are lower than the show's ratings in U.S. syndication or on Showtime, they're very strong for the niche Sci-Fi Channel. The previous week, for example, the top-rated show was a Star Trek marathon, which garnered a 1.0 rating.

Ratings for The Sci-Fi Channel will be available every Monday, but are delayed three weeks from the episode's airing. Watch GateWorld for "Redemption, Part 2" ratings next week.''



And here is the top ten shows for sci-fi channel that week ( at http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/

Top TEN Sci-Fi Channel Shows for the week of 6/3/-6/9/02:

SHOW HHR
Stargate SG-1 1.8
Farscape 1.6
Event Horizon 1.1
Screamers 0.9
Alien 0.9
Chameleon 0.8
Spiders 0.8
Alligator 2 0.7
Roswell: Aliens 0.7
Reptilian 0.6

 

[Hatshepsut]

Thank you very much for taking the trouble to reply, Star. It's much appreciated. You don't happen to know what the Showtime ratings were for a comparison, do you?

In a country the size of America, 1.8 million sounds an awfully small audience. We had an audience of around 3 million for 'University Challenge' which is a minority interest programme on B.B.C.2, a more specialized channel, in the U.K.

Thanks again

Best wishes,
Hatshepsut :wave:
--

 

[CynVision]

This is looking from my records of past stuff. The only thing I don't know for sure if this is for the network syndication or stuff from Showtime.

From the First-Run Weeklies section on Yahoo news grabber articles:
April 8 was 2.5/2.6 (-11)
April 22 2.5/2.7 (-14)
May 13 was 2.6/2.7 (- 4)
Percent change versus 2000-01 (when available) appears in parentheses.

I believe that was for a few of the final episodes of season five. Can anyone confirm? And confirm what numbers I'm looking at?

 

[Bizarro7]

Er...1.8?

Oh dear. That's supposed to be the season premiere, a lead-in to the season premiere of FARSCAPE, and with lots of advance advertising hype from SCI-FI. I can only imagine what's going to happen as the season progresses.

 

[gategeek]

ratings

actually, that number indicates an aproximately 40% INCREASE in viewership over that of Showtime due to the total percentage of homes that SciFi reaches. you might want to read the entire article before jumping to conclusions.
http://www.gateworld.net/news/ratings.html#newsitem1025542683,96088,
shanilka

 

[Hatshepsut]

Well, colour me dim, but I've read the article and it's as clear as mud!

I can't for the life of me see how 1.8 million viewers represents a 40% increase over 2.5 million viewers?

It makes me think of Disraeli's (?) comment about 'lies, damned lies and statistics'.

Thanks, all, for trying to spread a little light around here though.

Best wishes,
Hatshepsut :wave:
--

 

[gategeek]

here's another way of putting it courtesy of darren at gateworld:


Household ratings represent a percentage of the TV "universe" being measured. Those who don't get a particular network (and are thus outside the "universe") aren't counted. Sci-Fi's 1.8 shows that 1.8 of the 75 million people who get the basic cable network watched SG-1. Showtime's 3.2 (or so) shows that about 3.2 percent of their 30 million subscribers watched that episode last month.

Do the math, and it comes out something like this:

3.2 percent of 30 million (30 x 0.032) = 960,000 households
1.8 percent of 75 million (75 x 0.018) = 1,350,000 households

I'm not sure how many homes the show is in for syndication, but it'll obviously be by far the largest of the three -- and a good 2.6 rating will bring in most of the series' overall viewership.

But it should be noted that the move to Sci-Fi for Season Six has seen a huge jump in Stargate SG-1's viewership (more than 40 percent), because (as expected) Sci-Fi is in so many more homes.

 

[star]

Well, sci fi (although is avalible to more people) has A LOT less viewers than Showtime. Someone in a forum made some calculations and the numbers were pretty good.it was in

http://forums.delphiforums.com/starguideforums/start

Look for the tread that talks about ratings.

 

[Hatshepsut]

Thank you all again for attempting to enlighten my darkness and pointing me at various sites of interest.

However, having read all these offerings, I think obfuscation is the watchword here. I mean, if 1,350,000 households were tuned in to Stargate on Sci-fi, why not say 1,350,000 households were watching the programme?

Otherwise, if one needs to go and dig out a calculator to work out the figures, then it seems like it's just smoke and mirrors - designed to conceal rather than reveal.

I mean, just a bald "1.8" with no units after it, logically implies 1.8 *million* viewers rather than 1.8*%* of the maximum possible. Crazy!

And that figure still seems incredibly low, given that over twice as many households tuned into our minority interest university quiz series in little old Britain...

Best wishes,
Baffled Hatshepsut :wave:
--

 

[skydiver]

ratings numbers are beyond complicated. not only do they count households in general (a household is everyone who COULD have a tv on at a given time) they also count people within those households.
males 19-54
females 19-54
etc. they break it down to age groups, sexes...and on and on and on.

generally speaking, scifi has far more viewers than showtime. so (making numbers up here)
1.5% of 75 million is less than 1% of 150 million.

you could say they're down .5% but really they're not. they have a smaller piece, but of a much larger pie.

there will always be conflicting info. it's because the information can be interpreted adn spun however someone wants to spin it.

 

[gategeek]

okay, i think part of the problem here is the "comparing apples with oranges" thing. here is an attempt at explanation of the different rating systems courtesy of morjana:
The Nielsen Ratings are divided into many categories. Included among their reports are:

Prime Time - The Big Networks (ABC, CBC, NBC, FOX, UPN, WB, and PAX).
These ratings are released overnight, and also in a weekly report.
For an example of a weekly report, follow this link:

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/3542059.htm


Syndicated Programming - Those TV series that are ONLY shown as syndicated. TV series in this category include Andromeda, Mutant X, and Stargate SG-1 SEASON FOUR (only). For an example of the weekly syndicated ratings report, follow this link:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?
tmpl=story&u=/mediaweek/20020620/ad_bpimw/national_ratings_in_syndicat
ion__week_of_june_3__2002


Stargate SG-1 Season Six is NOT considered syndicated programming and is NOT considered prime time programming. Therefore, the ratings for this season will NOT be reflected in the Prime Time Ratings or the Syndicated Ratings.

HOWEVER, the Nielsen Ratings also have an ADDITIONAL ratings report called the Nielsen Galaxy report, that does track Science Fiction Programming, in which Stargate SG-1 SEASON SIX will be included.
Unfortunately, the information for this report is not released in the same timely manner as the previous two mentioned reports.

The Sci-Fi Channel posts the ratings every Monday over at Sci-Fi
Wire. Here's the link:

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/

On the left hand side of the page, below the menu, there is a text box. The results of the Nielsen Galaxy Report for the week ending (a date will be given) will appear at that time.

And - it's usually only there for one day - so don't forget to check
every Monday.

Here are a sampling of these reports over the past year or so.
Sci-Fi Ratings – Nielsen Galaxy Report - 6/3/02 - 6/9/02
SHOW HHR
Stargate SG-1.............1.8 - Redemption - Part One
Farscape..................1.6
Event Horizon.............1.1
Screamers.................0.9
Alien.....................0.9
Chameleon.................0.8
Spiders...................0.8
Alligator 2...............0.7
Roswell: Aliens...........0.7
Reptilian.................0.6

***********

Sci-Fi Ratings – Nielsen Galaxy Report - 4/29/02 - 5/05/02

Meteorites...............1.0
Meteor...................1.0
Species..................0.8
Farscape.................0.7
Laserhawk................0.7
Ghost in the Machine.....0.7
Farscape.................0.7
Thirteenth Floor.........0.7
Species II...............0.6
Existenz.................0.6

***********
Sci-Fi Ratings – Nielsen Galaxy Report - 3/18/02 - 3/24/02

Langoliers, Pt. 2........1.3
Children of the Corn.....1.0
It, Part 2...............1.0
The Colony...............1.0
Langoliers, Pt. 1........1.0
Bride of Chucky..........0.9
Pumpkinhead..............0.9
Beyond Thunderdome.......0.9
The Chronicle............0.8
Star Trek................0.8

******

Sci-Fi Ratings – Nielsen Galaxy Report - 9/25/00 - 10/1/00
Invisible Man............1.4
Species II...............1.4
Raiders of Lost Ark......1.3
Chameleon................1.2
John Edward..............1.0
Darwin Conspiracy........1.0
The Outer Limits.........0.9
Babylon 5................0.8
Farscape Marathon........0.8
Alien 3..................0.8

*********

 

[Hatshepsut]

Thank you for your efforts on my behalf. You really have tried and been very, very patient and I do appreciate it, but my poor head is spinning... :rolly2:

Why don't they just give the number of households tuned in to the T.V. programmes in question? Why complicate things by telling us how many people could have watched the programme if they'd been so inclined but weren't and didn't? We're not interested in those households so why drag them into it?

E.J.Barker, our geography lecturer, was extremely scathing about the use of percentages. The Chinese used to be particularly good at this sort of obfuscation. (This was back in the '60s)

As he said if you have one little old lady in a village, spinning wool, and then two more little old ladies take up spinning, then voilà, the village yarn production rate has increased by 300%. The fact that the actual amount of yarn produced is very small on a national scale and quality doesn't come into the equation is not mentioned, but they have wonderful statistics to brag about.

I don't think the American government has anything to fear about 'transparency' and freedom of information, etc. If they can disguise the facts about T.V. ratings this well, Mulder and Scully don't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting to the bottom of any government conspiracy

Scope for a cross-over fic. here?

Best wishes, and grateful thanks again
Hatshepsut :wave:
--

 

[gategeek]

i know ratings systems are hideously confusing but i have been
hearing some very strange numbers out there in cyberspace.
you cannot simply add up the showtime and syndication figures then compare them to the Sci Fi figures (which is what people have been doing to get the 70% "drop" in viewership that's being bandied about). for one thing, you would be "double counting" anyone who watched both showtime and syndication and there's no way to know what percentage of showtime viewers also watched in syndication. you also can't know what percentage of syndication viewers have cable TV or what percentage of cable TV viewers have access to SciFi.
all we have is information about how many people out of the whole potential Sci fi channel audience watched redemption part 1 - and according to the figures it was 40% more actual viewers than watched the last season premier on showtime.
shanilka

 

[Hatshepsut]

How would you be 'double-counting'? Surely the T.V. is either tuned in to e.g. Stargate or it's tuned into something else, or it's swtiched off? Where's the problem? Do you use split screens a lot or something?

Best wishes,
Hatshepsut - still... um... trying :wave:
--

 

[skydiver]

it's double counting in that...well here stargate airs on showtime 9pm friday, and in syndie 10pm sunday. it's incredibly easy for me to watch both showings should i wish.


syndie numbers are always going to be low because the episodes are used as filler by the local stations. Here it's 10pm on sunday night and then it used to be re-run at 1am sunday night....real ratings blockbusters there let me tell you.(at 1am here, you literally have to give commercial time away...the average late night commercial goes for $5 or less. ) And it's on our low power upn/fox affiliate.

Neilson gathers numbers in dozens of permutations. there are households, males 18-54, females 18-54, and other age groups, then a both males and females group....etc, etc, etc,

Also another thing to bear in mind...the Neilson numbers come from 5,000 households with the counters in them. Just 5,000 that represent the around 100 MILLION viewers out there.

 

[CynVision]

Originally posted by gategeek
Syndicated Programming - Those TV series that are ONLY shown as syndicated. TV series in this category include Andromeda, Mutant X, and Stargate SG-1 SEASON FOUR (only).
...
And - it's usually only there for one day - so don't forget to check
every Monday.

Here are a sampling of these reports over the past year or so.
Sci-Fi Ratings – Nielsen Galaxy Report - 6/3/02 - 6/9/02
SHOW HHR
Stargate SG-1.............1.8 - Redemption - Part One
Farscape..................1.6
Event Horizon.............1.1

So my numbers are for the syndication showing of season four. SG is top rated in that catagory on that report. The numbers, calculated upward with their special calcuations from the small group of sample households, predict that more people watch Stargate SG-1 than the other related shows. The time they are on is not seeming to matter. Enough stations run them at reasonable times to get the viewers.

Scifi explains their numbers like this: Scifi's top ten is based on Nielsen Galaxy report. The HHR is household rating. It is the average number of households that watched a specific show expressed as a percentage of all TV households. (The word "average" here is thowing me. What do they average? The number should be a number, not called an average.) For ScifiChannel and syndicated shows that regulary run more than once a week, they count the highest rated individual episode. If pre-empted, moved or shown in special time, they drop it from the list (pre-empt) or may list more than once in the top ten.

As for the numbers from Scifi, Stargate SG-1 has boosted Farscape's viewership by a goodly amount. I'm scared to mention numbers. The maths involved seem too complicated to me. What was clear to me was that Scifi's purchase of SG-1 has drawn a number of people to the channel for those shows. And the benefactor may be Farscape. It's just too bad, IMHO, that the storyline is a bit tough for non-Farscape fans to jump in and understand. The backstory is so compliated! If they want SG people to convert to fans of the Farscape show, they ought to be running promos for Farscape that 'splain some history.

 

[CynVision]

more definitions

There are two measures that you may see.
a rating is: % of overall population watching the show
a share is: % of people watching TV at a given time who are watching the show
Always keep straight what number you're looking at. And these numbers are mostly for advertisers to figure ad charges and network exectutives to figure wether to keep a show on the air.

To figure ratings:
a show on NBC uses US population
a show on SciFi uses 76% of US households
The practice is that NBC can be seen by nearly all people in America and Scifi reaches about 76% of US households with a TV.

5,000 to 6,000 people meters used by Nielsen.
The viewing habits of America are extrapolated from those people with an estimated 5% of error.

The comments about confusion and how it seems the longer you look at these numbers the stranger they appear is starting to make sense. I think it's the double standard aspect of the numbers that starts to wear on the mind. They don't want to just make it % of people in the US. Every show wants to look good and will manipulate the numbers that best make it look good vs. other shows.

from http://www.scifi.com/scifimag/june2002/tv/

 

[Hatshepsut]

Wow! Well, little did I realize when I posted my 'simple' question quite what I was letting myself in for... Pandora's Box has nothing on the American T.V. ratings system!

Skydiver wrote:
it's double counting in that...well here stargate airs on showtime 9pm friday, and in syndie 10pm sunday. it's incredibly easy for me to watch both showings should i wish.

Why does this matter? When a T.V. is tuned into a particular programme for more than one airing, there's no means of checking whether it's being watched by just one person both times, or two different people each time, or half the neighbourhood... Why not just count all the times the T.V. is tuned to the programme episode in question. It'll all balance out in the long run.

Neilson gathers numbers in dozens of permutations. there are households, males 18-54, females 18-54, and other age groups, then a both males and females group....etc, etc, etc,

Surely it's only the people who make the programmes - plus a few anoraks - who are interested in the demographics? Why complicate things for everyone else?

Also another thing to bear in mind...the Neilson numbers come from 5,000 households with the counters in them. Just 5,000 that represent the around 100 MILLION viewers out there.

Yes, our system is pretty much like that. Given that the whole thing is an extrapolation of such a small sample, isn't it a bit O.T.T. to try to read so much into it? Erm, I'm not asking this of you personally, Skydiver, just the world in general <G>

****

Cynvision, that was a masterly dissertation. If you don't have a doctorate in the subject, perhaps now's the time to think about it... The fog has thinned a little regarding the 'how?'.

Now I'm wondering about the 'why?' As in why make such a fuss about such a small number of households? I mean if there's a five per cent error rate, then that represents five million households which is a thousand times bigger than the original sample!

Again, thanks for all your assistance. It's been a fun ride

Best wishes,
Hatshepsut :wave:
--

 

[gategeek]

it has become a big issue because there were pronouncements on several lists about how "dreadful" and "dismal" the season 6 ratings were and alot of their information was based on a misunderstanding of the ratings system (for example the alleged 70% drop in viewers). there has also been alot of comparing of ratings percentage numbers when in fact you cannot accurately compare ratings percentages between systems.the same rating number that would get you cancelled on one network (say CBS), would be considered outstanding on another (say UPN).
for example - last week the top rated prime time show was CSI (on CBS) with a rating of 10.2, the top rated syndicated show was Wheel of Fortune with a rating of 7.5 and the top rated cable show was the world cup soccer final on ESPN with a rating of 3.6.
all of these are "top rated" shows but the numbers are vastly different.
shanilka