Stargate ratings

[gategrrl]

Okay. I have a question for those of you who follow the ratings for Stargate.

This is what This Person is saying on a Certain Forum:

In this case of season 9, the ratings for the first time have gone significantly downward in the second half of the season. TPTB probably still don't care, but I would think ratings speak volumes that some changes have not been good.

And even though some fans did not like seasons 7 and 8, they did do well in the ratings--particularly the second half of season 7 and all of 8. As long as ratings do well, why change things. Well, in season 9, they haven't gone as well, so maybe they will get their act together

This person repeats these "facts" like a Mantra as she's justifying the Greatness that is Sam Carter.

So, what's the real deal with the first run ratings these past three seasons?

Comments

[ldyanne.livejournal.com]

I really don't have a clue about ratings. I know that I haven't really watched much of the latter part of season 9.

But if the ratings are dipping in the last half of season 9, isn't that bad for the Greatness that is Sam Carter?

[gategrrl.livejournal.com]

Goodness, no. It's all that upstart Mitchell's fault.

[moonshayde.livejournal.com]

Total guess work.

Second half of seasons have their big finale build ups. Even if they suck, people tend to tune in to see what's going to happen

Season 9 is the anamoly perhaps because of a disconnect? Personally, I have found the over all show to be better in the second half than the first, but the first half had Jack (though limited) and lots of Vala (CB seems to have quite the fan base).

Season 8 I think was fairly consistent, but I also think a lot of people really really thought that was it. And many people knew that was it for Jack. I think that was a major factor for season 8.

I say these things because most people I encounter outside of the places that enshirne Vala, most people don't like her very much, don't hate Sam but don't worship her either. Think Mitchell is decent. Think Daniel is decent and like Teal'c. The majority of people I know don't want to see the show dripping with ship of any kind and just want adventure through the Stargate no matter what.

I see this on lists, other forums, Lj...just about everywhere.

It seems to me that there is a large group of people that want a lot of the same thing, and it's not what TPTB are giving us. Yet, despite it all, people keep watching anyway.

[superbadgirl]

/laughs at your icon

I would definitely say CB's fans might have something to do with it. The few I've encountered seem quite...well, rabid.

[moonshayde.livejournal.com]

You know how I feel about Sam/Jack. But frankly, the Vala fans scare me.

That's not to say there is anything wrong with liking Vala. I don't utterly despise her and I do think CB is a talented actress, but there are some fans that are pushing Vala that even outshines some of the rabid Daniel fans or the Sam/Jack fans.

[superbadgirl]

Ooooh, yeah. This is becoming a bit of a tangent off of the ratings discussion (discussions on ratings always leave me shaking my head, because I just don't care enough to understand), but I think any fan base that really lives up to its name of fanatical has the potential to be really scary.

Sometimes people are really insulting your favorite character and sometimes you just think they are because you're fanatical. ;)

I wonder if people are just worn out. I know I am. I love Daniel and Teal'c and Sam and wish I could be excited enough about them to keep watching the show when I'm not enjoying it as much as I should, but I'm not. People not in online fandom might be more likely to just stop tuning in, and that might be happening at long last.

Plus, I really do miss Jack and think they handled his sudden disappearance in a bad fashion. Bringing him back a year later to explain his absense might be too little, too late.

[moonshayde.livejournal.com]

I think those not in the online fandom were at a disadvantage in regard to Jack. While on scifi.com he says straight out what he's doing, it was never stated in the show. During Season 6, we were constantly reminded of Daniel throughout the entire season. His presence/non-presence made the changes--at least for me--more workable.

With Jack, he was mentioned all in the first few episodes and then quickly disappeared. (Janet asked Daniel and Teal'c in Ripple Effect where Jack was and we still didn't get an answer.) I think TPTB wanted to play it safe, but to alienate the audience in that way really impacts the entire show. Especially with Jack having been a hugely popualr character.

That's why i think I a lot of the ratings focus on Jack and Vala. Vala, more than Mitchell I think, is drawing in a huge fanbase. Plus you have many of the Farscape fans that had never been invested in the show before. To lose Vala and Jack leaves us with Sam, Cam, Daniel, and Teal'c to contend with.

I already know some people will refuse to watch Sam-centric episodes. Not even once. That can effect Sam related episodes. On the other hand, I'm willing to bet there are people that flat out refuse to watch Daniel-centric episodes either. The infighting between some groups on both of these sides could in fact play out at least in part on the ratings and demogrpahics of the show. Though, I think some of the Sam/Daniel animosity has been refocused to a Sam/Vala standoff.

As for Mitchell...I don't think enough fans are invested in him at this point. Vala was introduced way before Mitchell was, so at least fans knew who she was. It may not be far on Mitchell, but that is how it goes. Teal'c...well Teal'c might be saying more this year and I am of the opinion that despite the boring Jaffa stand and talk Council scenes, Teal'c has been consistently good this year. However, he's still Teal'c. Doesn't matter how many lines or scenes you give him--he's not the center of the onlien fan world.

All those factors combined along with what Nialla said and I think that makes for a good recipe in understanding Season 9.

[betacandy.livejournal.com]

I don't really follow the ratings, but assuming this person is correct about the drop-off in S9, I think attributing it to Sam's prominence or lack thereof is illogical.

I speculated, and still would bet money, that it's CB brought in the ratings at the beginning, when they were setting records with 18-34 year old guys who would watch her in a feminine hygeine commercial. She left, the ratings dropped.

It would be more logical to argue that the ratings dropped because Sam returned, but I don't think that's the case, either (people seemed to find her much easier to take in 9). I think it's just CB bringin' in the fanboys, pure and simple. I don't even think Browder's making an impact in ratings.

But, this is pure speculation. That's also what any industry conclusions are; the difference is, I admit it.

[nialla]

This may be more than you want to know, but here's the ratings for season 9:

9.01 “Avalon Part 1″ 2.1
9.02 “Avalon Part 2″ 2.1
9.03 “Origin Part 3″ 2.0
9.04 “The Ties That Bind” 2.0
9.05 “The Powers That Be” 2.0
9.06 “Beachhead” 1.9
9.07 “Ex Deus Machina” 1.9
9.08 “Babylon” 2.0 (this one and the next aired the same night and don't have separate ratings -- I used 1.8 again to come up with the average)
9.09 “Prototype” and
9.10 “The Fourth Horseman Part 1″ 1.8
9.11 “The Fourth Horseman Part 2″ 1.9
9.12 “Collateral Damage″ 1.7
9.13 “Ripple Effect″ 1.8
9.14 “Stronghold″ 1.8
9.15 “Ethon″ 1.5
9.16 “Off the Grid″ 1.6
9.17 “The Scourge″ 1.6
9.18 “Arthur’s Mantle″ 1.7
9.19 “Crusade″ 1.8
9.20 “Camelot″ 1.9

Season eight:
NEW ORDER, PART 1 2.4
NEW ORDER, PART 2 2.4
LOCKDOWN 2.0
ZERO HOUR 2.2
ICON 2.2
AVATAR 1.8
AFFINITY 1.8
COVENANT 2.1
SACRIFICES 1.7
ENDGAME 1.8
GEMINI 2.0
PROMETHEUS UNBOUND 2.1
IT'S GOOD TO BE KING 2.1
FULL ALERT 2.0
CITIZEN JOE 1.7
RECKONING, PART 1 2.1
RECKONING, PART 2 2.1
THREADS 2.1
MOEBIUS, PART 1 2.3
MOEBIUS, PART 2 2.4

The overall season average for 8 was 2.1, 9 was 1.8. A dip, but nothing huge really. The first halves of each season averaged a 2.0, with the 2nd half of 8 receiving 2.1 and the 2nd half of 9 getting 1.7. On the surface, that may seem like a big dip, but the second half of season nine was up against the Olympics, as well as new episodes of network television, such as the results of "Dancing with the Stars" that season eight didn't have as competition.

Considering that many weeks SG1, SGA, and BSG wer all within a tenth of a point of each other, we don't have anything to worry about yet. I have to sign off now, but I can get you the season seven ratings too. :)

[moonshayde.livejournal.com]

That sucks because I really liked Ethon...I thought it was one of the few eps this year that had an emotional impact and that also showed that the characters cared for each other.

[nialla]

I liked Ethon as well. Not sure why the ratings weren't higher, but it's all a crapshoot anyway.

[gategrrl.livejournal.com]

I guess I'm just really tired of this person touting the ratings like they're the be-all. In a way they *are* - to the *advertisers* and how much they can charge.

I've heard that the first half of the season is the hard-sell; meaning that it's broadcast during the start of the summer, the worse part of the season for TV shows. And yet, that's when the "Daniel-heavy" shows are aired. The "Sam-heavy" shows tend be aired in the part of the season when more people are tuned in and so, those episodes have it easier with the ratings. Daniel is therefore the heavy-hitter when it comes to bringing viewers in, if you follow that line of thinking. It's the same line of thinking, of course, that Supernova, the person I quoted, uses as well (for Sam, of course, though).

At least, that's what I've heard.

[moonshayde.livejournal.com]

Yeah but like someone said, Sam then had to compete with Dancing with the Stars and The Olympics.

While I agree the summer has some disadvantages, it's only the time of year that most major shows are off. You have your filler shows on the networks, but other than that networks like scifi can shine during these "off seasons".

[nialla]

I've been doing some more digging. Turns out that the ratings number represents a different number of viewers depending on the season (based on the potential audience, which is the number of people who have access to Sci Fi). Season six was 1 = 780,000, 7th season was 1 = 1,096,000, while 8th and 9th was 1 = 1,340,000.

Factoring in those numbers, Season Six lost an average of 42,500 viewers between the first and second half of the season. Season Seven gained over 249,000, Eight gained over 549,000, Nine gained over 174,200.

Go over to my LJ and you can see the ratings compared. I've included SGA's as well, and by comparison SGA had a much bigger drop.

[rydra_wong]

Turns out that the ratings number represents a different number of viewers depending on the season (based on the potential audience, which is the number of people who have access to Sci Fi).

Ah, ratings analysis fun *g*.

*has flashbacks to Save Farscape campaigning*

Yep, because the number of people with access to SciFi is increasing pretty rapidly, and the ratings number is computed relative to that, a lower ratings number can actually mean more people watching than in a previous year.

Without getting into the sort of detail that gives me post-traumatic flashbacks, my strictly-amateur guess would be that the most significant factors are likely to be how the show is doing relative to SGA and BSG, and of course the number we don't know: what SciFi are paying for it.

[nialla]

I think the number of people with access has leveled off the last two years, but it does mean that ratings before that time have a different value.

I know it's been said that Stargate had good ratings on Showtime, but it wasn't enough of a draw to get people to subscribe when they could wait a year and watch it for free. Since Showtime has a smaller potential audience than Sci Fi (because Sci Fi is often part of basic cable, while Showtime is extra), it was probably fewer people overall watching, but more people were watching out of the potential that could get the channel.

Another thing we don't know is which SG-1 episode is making the top ten each week. During first run, we assume it's that one, but even when there's no SG-1 on Friday, it still makes the top ten. One has to assume that's part of the Monday night or weekday lineup, but that calls into question just how high the ratings are for the repeats, since Sci Fi only lists the highest one. It's quite possible that repeat episodes have beaten new ones, and not just new ones for SG-1 either.

I'm pretty sure that SG-1 and SGA are rather symbiotic in their budgets, using some of the same sets, and sharing the same pool of writers, producers and directors. However, repeats of SGA aren't in the top ten. It doesn't seem to have the "legs" that SG-1 does in repeat showings. If SG-1 goes down with the ship, I'm not sure SGA could stay afloat on its own.

[nialla]

I'm not following that a drop in the ratings of the second half is a positive thing in regards to Sam Carter. The ratings were at their highest when Sam was gone, and started going under 2.0 upon her return.

I'm not Vala's biggest fan by any means, but Claudia Black certainly brought the boys to the yard.