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

[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.