TAR Ratings for last week

[itiparanoid13]

I expected a tiny bit higher, but for it's premiere week, it's not doing bad.  TAR averaged a .4 rating which is an 11% increase from original 9PM programming.  The median age of primetime for GSN has dropped to 50 years old, and it's doing .22 in the key 18-49 demographic that the network strives for no matter what (by looking at their new programming slate).  This is a 69% increase from previous programming.  Full story is at Buzzer.

[xibit777]

Oh well.  It's summer too so people are probably not watching TV.  Kind of funny how it got 69% better in the age group, yet it replaced shows like Dog Eat Dog and casino shows which tried to attract that specific age group.

I have a hard time believing the median age group for last week's primetime was 62 years old.   Half the people over 62... watching Casino shows and Dog Eat Dog?  lol   Maybe they're all watching Millionaire.

[CaseyAbell]

The network's press release is here. The overall household increase is the smallest number, with bigger jumps for total viewers and demos. GSN skews so old - a median age of 57.5 in prime time prior to Amazing Race, and a timeslot median of 54 prior to the show - that almost any bump in 18-49 or 25-54 would produce a big percentage increase.

The network gives a 350K total viewer number, and the .40 rating would translate to about 230K households. Again a modest household total, but the younger demos mean more viewers per household. That's always been a problem for the network.

The show still has an incompatible lead-in. Backtracking from the pre-Race numbers the network gives - 57.5 for all prime time, 54 for the 9:00 slot - Millionaire's median age is probably pushing 60. Iti's sources and some published bits of information indicate that Millionaire is getting about a 0.5 or 0.6 household rating compared to Race's 0.4.

What seems to be happening is that some of Millionaire's oldest viewers are switching away, while Amazing Race is pulling younger viewers who are not big fans of Regis' show or traditional game shows in general. It's possible (but not a cinch, of course) that Race would do better with a more compatible lead-in. But Millionaire isn't going anywhere after the renewal and the licensing of additional episodes.

At any rate, there really does seem to be a sea change in GSN's audience at 9:00, from Millionaire's median age near 60 to Amazing Race's median of 42. How this plays into GSN's decisions on future programming will be interesting to see.

[cmjb13]

Call me in a few months and then let's see them maintain those ratings.

The key isn't how they do initially, because anyone can draw curiosity the first time out (see XFL). The key is to get them to come back and watch again and get them watching consistently.

Remember when GSN sent out a PR on Whammy! being the highest rated original debut (or something along those lines.) There was no way they would be able to keep those numbers over the long haul under any circumstances. What good did that do them?

E! did the same thing with Anna Nicole's show being highly rated. Now, nobody gives 2 twigs about that show.

So why send out a PR about it? I understand a cable outlet would exploit any good news that they can scrape up. But in the long run, it does more harm than good. Because it's like what happened?

[Don Howard]

[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Jul 20 2005, 07:20 AM\']How this plays into GSN's decisions on future programming will be interesting to see.

[snapback]91860[/snapback]

[/quote]
Not really.

[CaseyAbell]

Call me in a few months and then let's see them maintain those ratings.

Maintaining the 0.4 household rating wouldn't be that big of a deal. After all, it's not far above what the timeslot was getting before. Though it's hardly a bad number compared to what GSN has been averaging lately in prime time.

Keeping the median age down will be tougher. That's the real news from the first week of ratings. For GSN to get a 42 median age is something the network isn't used to. The nice viewer-per-household ratio is something the network isn't used to.

Not really.

Interest is in the attention span of the beholder, I guess. But for the first time GSN looks to have a show that can deliver better overall household and viewer numbers...and younger demos. Dodgeball is their other younger-demo play, but it doesn't pull much of a household rating.

Will Race's numbers - if they continue - encourage the network to license other younger-skewing series from the networks, or to develop more of their own? I don't think it will discourage them.

[cmjb13]

[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Jul 20 2005, 10:19 AM\']

Call me in a few months and then let's see them maintain those ratings.

Maintaining the 0.4 household rating wouldn't be that big of a deal. After all, it's not far above what the timeslot was getting before. Though it's hardly a bad number compared to what GSN has been averaging lately in prime time.

Keeping the median age down will be tougher. That's the real news from the first week of ratings. For GSN to get a 42 median age is something the network isn't used to. The nice viewer-per-household ratio is something the network isn't used to.[/quote]
Ok then.

Call me in a few months and then let's see them maintain those demos.

[xibit777]

Why would it be hard to maintain those demos?  The same older people that watch Millionaire aren't going to want to see young adults running around on a savenger hunt reality show.   So the demos should always be younger.   Whether or not the total ratings stay up is another question though.  But I don't see any reason why people would just suddenly stop watching TAR.  It won't be in repeats for a long time, the episodes get better as time goes on (from what everyone says), new people will end up finding that it is on GSN.   So I think it will do well for them for a while.  2-3 years later when they're still under burden of this huge lease there might be issues.   No reality show has ever lasted in repeats for 3-4 years.  Especially if there are only 100 episodes with an episode being shown every single day of the week.

I think their main problem was they signed the lease for too long.  But whoever sold them the show probably forced them to so they could get more money.

[Don Howard]

[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Jul 20 2005, 09:19 AM\']

Not really.

Interest is in the attention span of the beholder, I guess. But for the first time GSN looks to have a show that can deliver better overall household and viewer numbers...and younger demos.

[snapback]91863[/snapback]

[/quote]
True this. And I do want the channel to succeed cuz I love what they show during the daytime.

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Jul 20 2005, 09:19 AM\']Maintaining the 0.4 household rating wouldn't be that big of a deal. [/quote]
Umm, OK.  You go out, spend a load of money on something.  If you don't get very much mileage out of it, I bet you'd be unhappy too.

[CaseyAbell]

Umm, OK. You go out, spend a load of money on something. If you don't get very much mileage out of it, I bet you'd be unhappy too.

Huh? GSN is very happy about the much younger demos that Amazing Race is getting. The show has also improved its timeslot's overall household rating, so it's a double winner.

My guess is that the household rating will improve some more before rerun cycles grind it down - same as what happened to Millionaire. The 0.40 is a little better than the network's timeslot average lately, but not that much better. As more of Nielsen's remote-flippers sample the show, I think the number will rise some.

The real test is whether the show can continue to perform in the demos. There's reason for optimism, as other posters have pointed out. But the demos are probably what the network's execs will watch most closely.