Thursday Super Millionaire ratings...

[weaklink75]

Not bad, as it beat NBC's Law and Order:Criminal Intent rerun, although it trailed the Without A Trace season finale on CBS...it also went up a half a point from Tuesday's show.

Without a Trace: 13.1/22
Super Millionaire: 6.6/11
Law & Order: Criminal Intent: 6.1/10

[tvwxman]

[quote name=\'weaklink75\' date=\'May 21 2004, 03:12 PM\'] Not bad, as it beat NBC's Law and Order:Criminal Intent rerun, although it trailed the Without A Trace season finale on CBS...it also went up a half a point from Tuesday's show.

Without a Trace: 13.1/22
Super Millionaire: 6.6/11
Law & Order: Criminal Intent: 6.1/10 [/quote]
 According to Marc Berman of Mediaweek, ABC can't be too thrilled....the 18-49 demos  have been awful.

I can't help but think that SM is a great sweeps show to run in every book EXCEPT May, where series finale/cliffhangers command a large chunk of the viewing audience.

Then again, what else is ABC gonna put on?

ms

[GS Warehouse]

[quote name=\'weaklink75\' date=\'May 21 2004, 04:12 PM\'] Without a Trace: 13.1/22
Super Millionaire: 6.6/11
Law & Order: Criminal Intent: 6.1/10 [/quote]
Without a Trace has just become the third drama whose highest-rated show of the season came against this series of SM, following CSI: Miami and Law & Order: Special Victims Unit.  I do not think Reege will be back in November.

[Craig Karlberg]

Me too Jason.  That's one game show where the top prize will NEVER be achieved.  RATTS!!!!!!!

[DrJWJustice]

[quote name=\'Craig Karlberg\' date=\'May 22 2004, 04:33 AM\'] Me too Jason.  That's one game show where the top prize will NEVER be achieved.  RATTS!!!!!!! [/quote]
 That's entirely because for anyone to win $10 million, they'd have to risk $4.9 million to do it.  Who in their right mind would do that, unless they were absolutely sure of the right answer???

[sotcfan2004]

[quote name=\'DrJWJustice\' date=\'May 24 2004, 12:32 AM\'] That's entirely because for anyone to win $10 million, they'd have to risk $4.9 million to do it.  Who in their right mind would do that, unless they were absolutely sure of the right answer??? [/quote]
 I'm sure many of us were thinking the same thing when WWTBAM first premiered in 1999.  Since then, playing for millions on TV is no big thing.  Take Dan Blonsky (Millionaire #2).  At first glance, he didn't seem to sure of the answer.  But, after talking it out, he finally decided on the right one, thus putting him in an entirely new tax bracket.  It's happened before, and it can happen again.
As far as Super Millionaire goes, I think the format is great.  I find myself getting all the goosebumps I got when WWTBAM first went on the air.  If they could just get someone in the hot seat with the grapes to go for broke, they would repeat their earlier success.  I think it should be brought back as a once-a-week series.  The thing that killed 'Millionaire' was constant overexposure.  If you leave viewers hanging for 7 days, you might just build up a loyal following.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'sotcfan2004\' date=\'May 24 2004, 01:04 PM\'] I'm sure many of us were thinking the same thing when WWTBAM first premiered in 1999.  Since then, playing for millions on TV is no big thing. [/quote]
 My God, I sincerely hope you're wrong. I know inflation hasn't risen to the point to equate a $400K gamble five years ago to a FIVE MILLION DOLLAR one today.

I don't see how "playing for millions is no big thing." Show me another show where you can realistically win a million dollars in a single episode.

[sotcfan2004]

Well, anything's possible.  Remember that there are people out there with balls.  And yes, back in '99, $500,000 was a lot of money, as it is today.  This game is all about how gutsy you wanna be, which is what gives it charm.

[Craig Karlberg]

That's why Reege says "Great risks, even greater rewards" or something like that.  I think the risks/rewards seem too large if you ask me.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Craig Karlberg\' date=\'May 25 2004, 03:33 AM\'] That's why Reege says "Great risks, even greater rewards" or something like that.  I think the risks/rewards seem too large if you ask me. [/quote]
 "Great risks, even greater rewards?" Funny. The ultimate risk in the game is $4,900,000 to win $5,000,000. Not sure that's all THAT much greater a reward.

[Gromit]

[quote name=\'sotcfan2004\' date=\'May 24 2004, 01:04 PM\'] I'm sure many of us were thinking the same thing when WWTBAM first premiered in 1999.  Since then, playing for millions on TV is no big thing.  Take Dan Blonsky (Millionaire #2).  At first glance, he didn't seem to sure of the answer.  But, after talking it out, he finally decided on the right one, thus putting him in an entirely new tax bracket.  It's happened before, and it can happen again.
 [/quote]
 I agree with the original poster, the million winners have all been certain of the answer before they went on.

My impression when watching Blonsky was that his reaction was "Whoa, that's a damn easy question. Ok, hold on here, check this through. Don't throw it away by doing something stupid. Is there some trick question I'm missing?" After pausing, double checking, he was certain when he went ahead. His facial expression and reaction during the final question is not one of doubt or uncertainty.

Same thing for Trela. As a computer geek, I'm sure he knew that moth question. That's standard beginning computer course stuff. He went through that same thought process, and I've always thought that he stretched out the tension intentionally. I always admired him for that, if it was me and that question had popped up I'd have been yelling "Moth, final answer" and jumping up and down before the four possible answers appeared. With Joe needing the money, and his situation at the time, there's no way he risks $500K without being certan.

Carpenter we know that he was 100% sure. So, who does that leave us with? I don't remember these wins well enough to comment on exactly how confident they appeared:

Bob House (element named after scientists)
Kim Hunt (landlocked country)
David Goodman (Paddington country)
Bernie Cullen (airplane registration)
Kevin Olmstead (Sikorsky helicopter)
Ed Toutant (aerosol cans)

[DrJWJustice]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'May 25 2004, 10:38 AM\'] [quote name=\'Craig Karlberg\' date=\'May 25 2004, 03:33 AM\'] That's why Reege says "Great risks, even greater rewards" or something like that.  I think the risks/rewards seem too large if you ask me. [/quote]
"Great risks, even greater rewards?" Funny. The ultimate risk in the game is $4,900,000 to win $5,000,000. Not sure that's all THAT much greater a reward. [/quote]
 This is one of those few instances when Chris' "Mo' Money Syndrome" theory is actually playing out, to a point.  Granted, the mid-tier questions are far more difficult than they are on the syndie strip of the show.  This shouldn't surprise any of us, since ABC simply can't afford to give away $1 million to every player who graces the show.  Bear in mind that the $1 million question on SM is the $125,000 question on the daytime show.  

IMO, the show would work better if ABC would (1) make the questions easier through the mid-tier and (2) drop the top prize from $10 million to, say, $2.5 million.  Sill 'mo money' than the daytime show, but it seems more realistic to me for a Super Millionaire special.  With less money to risk throughout the money tree, we should see an increase in players willing to take the risk.

BTW, Chris, I'm not sure I'd even want to risk $2.4 million for an additional $2.5 million. :-)

I'll bet that we'll never see anyone play a $5 million question, assuming SM returns.

[DrJWJustice]

[quote name=\'sotcfan2004\' date=\'May 24 2004, 03:04 PM\'] to go for broke, they would repeat their earlier success.  I think it should be brought back as a once-a-week series.  The thing that killed 'Millionaire' was constant overexposure.  If you leave viewers hanging for 7 days, you might just build up a loyal following. [/quote]
 We had this debate back in 1999/2000.  When it was announced that Millionaire was to become a regular series, there were quite a few of us who felt that it should be aired only once per week.  Anything more would kill the show for overexposure.  In short order, we were proven right by ABC's decision to air three times -- then four times -- per week.  

I don't think we need to see Millionaire as a regular primetime series again.  The temptation was too great to overexpose it in 2000, and it'll still be there -- albeit reduced -- if a new regular series is tried.

[MSTieScott]

[quote name=\'Gromit\' date=\'Jun 2 2004, 01:12 AM\']I don't remember these wins well enough to comment on exactly how confident they appeared:

Bob House (element named after scientists)
Kim Hunt (landlocked country)
David Goodman (Paddington country)
Bernie Cullen (airplane registration)
Kevin Olmstead (Sikorsky helicopter)
Ed Toutant (aerosol cans)[/quote]

I remember that Kevin Olmstead knew the helicopter question cold. He took a look, paused, then said something along the lines of "It's Sikorsky. So I will make Sikorsky my final answer." He sounded nervous, but I think that's because he realized he was about to win over two million dollars. I also remember reading an interview in which he stated that he knew the answer.

Some atgs searching reveals that Bob House used both his 50:50 and Phone-a-Friend on his question. Don't know if he had an inkling going into it, though.

Kim Hunt took a while to lock in his answer, and I seem to remember some struggling there.

David Goodman used all three lifelines, and according to the recap, "David thinks he knows this, but Haggai [his Phone-a-Friend] is called."

Bernie Cullen narrowed his last question down to two, then his 50:50 eliminated one of the choices he thought it was.

Ed Toutant was leaning toward an answer, and used his 50:50 to strengthen his hunch.


So at least a couple of them weren't 100% sure.

--
Scott Robinson

(As for me, I'm not sure I'd risk nearly a million dollars even if the next question was "What is your middle name?")

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'MSTieScott\' date=\'Jun 2 2004, 05:08 PM\'] Some atgs searching reveals that Bob House used both his 50:50 and Phone-a-Friend on his question. Don't know if he had an inkling going into it, though. [/quote]
 House used his two lifelines because he had them, and not using them would have been idiotic.  His chemistry question was a pretty easy one for anybody with even a passing awareness of the elements, and it sure seemed to me that he knew it cold.