Author Topic: Holiday marathon ratings (Read 8174 times)

LetsGoYankees · « **on:** January 04, 2013, 03:46:28 PM »

http://sonofthebronx...24-30-2012.html
http://buzzerblog.co...ngs-report-gsn/

Averages
American Bible Challenge (Sun December 23 3pm-Midnight): 175,000 viewers (Highest: 255,000 viewers; Lowest: 118,000 viewers)
Minute to Win It (Mon December 24 8am-6pm): 253,000 viewers (Highest: 363,000 viewers at 1pm; Lowest: 51,000 viewers at 8am)
Match Game (Christmas 8am-5pm): 217,000 viewers (Highest 342,000 viewers at 10:30am; Lowest: 112,000 viewers at 8am)
Steve Harvey's Family Feud (Wednesday 8am-1pm): 190,000 viewers; (1pm-6pm): 471,000 (6pm-Midnight): 561,000 viewers

J.R. · « **Reply #1 on:** January 04, 2013, 04:36:53 PM »

"we"?

TLEberle · « **Reply #2 on:** January 04, 2013, 04:38:16 PM »

It's cute that LGY thinks he's some sort of authority on the topic.

PYLdude · « **Reply #3 on:** January 04, 2013, 04:47:16 PM »

I'll assume "sonofthebronx" is his blog...which makes it even less tasteful that he'd cite his own blog. Which he probably copied from Buzzerblog.

BrandonFG · « **Reply #4 on:** January 04, 2013, 04:51:20 PM »

Quote from: TLEberle on January 04, 2013, 04:38:16 PM

It's cute that LGY thinks ~~he's some sort of authority on the topic.~~ anyone cares, despite all but being told we don't.

Fixed.

clemon79 · « **Reply #5 on:** January 04, 2013, 04:52:34 PM »

Quote from: PYLdude on January 04, 2013, 04:47:16 PM

I'll assume "sonofthebronx" is his blog...which makes it even less tasteful that he'd cite his own blog. Which he probably copied from Buzzerblog.

Know how I know you didn't actually look at it?

It appears that GSN is far, far from the only channel he has a hard-on for ratings over.

chad1m · « **Reply #6 on:** January 04, 2013, 05:02:22 PM »

SonoftheBronx is the blog of Douglas Pucci, who compiles and reports weekly ratings for cable stations that are not as widely reported, a service greatly appreciated by people like me who like to know (and intelligently report, I'd like to hope) how certain mid-level cable networks are doing. It is no way related to the less-than-original poster of the thread.

TLEberle · « **Reply #7 on:** January 04, 2013, 05:03:12 PM »

Phooey. Now I can't make a Strike it Rich joke at the expense of one of our "special" people.

SwohS Emag · « **Reply #8 on:** January 04, 2013, 05:42:02 PM »

I, for one, appreciated the digest recap of the numbers, especially since Buzzerblog is blocked on my office firewall as a "gambling" site.

Am I missing something as to why there are people upset that this was posted? Are there bandwidth limitations on the Forum which cause posts like this to take up space from others who wish to post? Or is it just simply better to not have an active Forum section?

TLEberle · « **Reply #9 on:** January 04, 2013, 05:48:33 PM »

For one, I prefer a void to nonsense. Nonsense posts push down, well, at this point it's fifteen or so nonsense topics from him, I guess.

Casey · « **Reply #10 on:** January 04, 2013, 06:57:34 PM »

I fail to see how this constitutes a "nonsense" post. It was coherent. It was concise. That you find it uninteresting does not make it nonsense. Certainly in comparison to other posters on here, it was pretty relevant to the topic, and some people may (and apparently do) find it interesting enough.

clemon79 · « **Reply #11 on:** January 04, 2013, 07:16:04 PM »

Quote from: isucgv on January 04, 2013, 06:57:34 PM

Certainly in comparison to other posters on here, it was pretty relevant to the topic, and some people may (and apparently do) find it interesting enough.

I am utterly thrilled that you enjoyed it. What I could do without is the exceptionally-thinly-veiled editorializing about how what they're doing Isn't Working that made Casey Abell just as tedious.

Fedya · « **Reply #12 on:** January 04, 2013, 09:05:47 PM »

Did the OP retro-edit his post? Because one person made a reference to a "we" that didn't include him, and somebody Lemon just mentioned the editorializing that's definitely been in earlier posts from the OP, but I didn't notice here..

TLEberle · « **Reply #13 on:** January 04, 2013, 09:32:52 PM »

He edited out everything but the numbers. Lesson learned.

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #14 on:** January 04, 2013, 09:35:43 PM »

Quote from: Fedya on January 04, 2013, 09:05:47 PM

Did the OP retro-edit his post? Because one person made a reference to a "we" that didn't include him, and somebody Lemon just mentioned the editorializing that's definitely been in earlier posts from the OP, but I didn't notice here..

Yes. He had some line in there about "we know" or something to that effect. Its a trick that he's pulled before that further undermines what little credibility he has.