This renewal of Feud has me thinking...

[cmjb13]

This current version of Feud is pulling in an average of 2.5 according to the Professor.

Does anyone know what the tail end of Combs Syndicated/Dawson's season was pulling in?

I know numbers then and numbers now aren't quite alike, but if the 1994-1995 version was pulling a 2.5, do you think it would have been renewed?

Of course the added expense of taping in 33 didn't help (Wonder why they didn't try to move it somewhere else)

[Ian Wallis]

I know numbers then and numbers now aren't quite alike, but if the 1994-1995 version was pulling a 2.5, do you think it would have been renewed?

I'm not sure what the numbers were, but it really shows have far ratings have dropped to be considered respectable.  

Big hit shows of the '70s - "All in the Family", "Mary Tyler Moore", etc. were said to have drawn 40 million viewers, while shows that drew 10 million were considered big disasters.  Now, shows that draw 10 million are automatically renewed!  I guess that's what happens in a 500-channel universe.

[tommycharles]

[quote name=\'cmjb13\' date=\'Jan 14 2004, 08:10 AM\'] This current version of Feud is pulling in an average of 2.5 according to the Professor.

Does anyone know what the tail end of Combs Syndicated/Dawson's season was pulling in?

I know numbers then and numbers now aren't quite alike, but if the 1994-1995 version was pulling a 2.5, do you think it would have been renewed?

Of course the added expense of taping in 33 didn't help (Wonder why they didn't try to move it somewhere else) [/quote]
 I remember seeing a shot of a ratings list on the E!THS on Feud that mentioned that when Dawson (Daytime) was at the end of it's run, it was doing badly by pulling a 3.1 or so. I think Price often reaches 4.something, but it's number 2!

Oh, and I think Combs was averaging about a 2.5 when Dawson was brought in.

[calliaume]

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Jan 14 2004, 09:18 AM\']

I know numbers then and numbers now aren't quite alike, but if the 1994-1995 version was pulling a 2.5, do you think it would have been renewed?

I'm not sure what the numbers were, but it really shows have far ratings have dropped to be considered respectable.  

Big hit shows of the '70s - "All in the Family", "Mary Tyler Moore", etc. were said to have drawn 40 million viewers, while shows that drew 10 million were considered big disasters.  Now, shows that draw 10 million are automatically renewed!  I guess that's what happens in a 500-channel universe. [/quote]
 This is a bit apples and oranges -- Family Feud doesn't run in prime time in most markets like All in the Family did in 1974.

This site shows top 30 prime time ratings for each year for nearly 50 years.  I've picked the 1973-74 season -- the top show, All in the Family averaged 20,687,000 of the 68,500,000 sets then available, for a 30.2 ratings.  (Impossible to calculate share from these numbers.)

However, when you consider the options in most markets at that point were the three networks, maybe one independent station, and PBS on UHF, it's not surprising that the shows rated as highly as they did.  (Also consider:  no VCRs or DVD players, no Internet, movies didn't release to 3,000 theaters in one weekend, we had to walk seven miles through the snow to get to school, and electricity hadn't been invented.)

Feud isn't really much more successful than Hollywood Squares has been, but it's a lot cheaper to produce.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'cmjb13\' date=\'Jan 14 2004, 06:10 AM\'] Of course the added expense of taping in 33 didn't help (Wonder why they didn't try to move it somewhere else) [/quote]
 It was a big set. 33 is prolly the only place they COULD do it, to move it somewhere else would require snuggling up the set a bit (and frankly, that's one of the things I dislike about the current incarnation.)

[HSquares2003]

I thought the first season of the current version(Louie's from 99 and part of 2000) was shot in 33? The credits had said CBS Television City until about May 2000.

[cmjb13]

[quote name=\'HSquares2003\' date=\'Jan 14 2004, 12:13 PM\'] I thought the first season of the current version(Louie's from 99 and part of 2000) was shot in 33? The credits had said CBS Television City until about May 2000. [/quote]
 I believe it was taped at TVC, but in the backlot (either Studio 36 or 46), not 33.

[zachhoran]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 14 2004, 11:49 AM\']
It was a big set. 33 is prolly the only place they COULD do it, to move it somewhere else would require snuggling up the set a bit (and frankly, that's one of the things I dislike about the current incarnation.) [/quote]
 The ABC Feud set took up about as much space as the CBS Feud set, no? Both were similarly designed IIRC(not counting the 1994-95 season)

[ChuckNet]

I believe it was taped at TVC, but in the backlot (either Studio 36 or 46), not 33.

Yeah, the audience used bleachers, as opposed to the "sunken" audience area in 33.

Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")

[HYHYBT]

It was a big set. 33 is prolly the only place they COULD do it, to move it somewhere else would require snuggling up the set a bit (and frankly, that's one of the things I dislike about the current incarnation.)

The 1994 set didn't seem to take up much room. It was, after all, built for travelling.

[CaseyAbell]

The site calliaume referenced is a nice stroll down memory lane - and a reminder of how ratings have constantly shrivelled as more and more choices became available to viewers. Back in the fifties the top shows could reach a ridiculous percentage of teevee households, because there was so little competition. The percentages have declined steadily ever since, until a ten rating now makes your show a hit...unless the demos are too old (grim laugh).

Have to wonder what the ratings universe will look like twenty or thirty years from now.  Will the top shows get maybe a five or six rating? The numbers the networks collect on Friday and Saturday now may look downright robust in the zillion-channel universe.

[calliaume]

[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Feb 5 2004, 09:19 AM\'] Have to wonder what the ratings universe will look like twenty or thirty years from now.  Will the top shows get maybe a five or six rating? The numbers the networks collect on Friday and Saturday now may look downright robust in the zillion-channel universe. [/quote]
Of course, by that time TV Guide will be an inch and a half thick each week, and we'll have The Card Sharks Channel, Go! Network, NG/DG Zone, and Hot Potato World.

And the message board for The Price Is Right Channel will still contain speculation on when Barker will retire.

[tvrandywest]

Yes, gross ratings is the biggest criteria in determining renewals. And yes, the fractionalization of viewership has changed the definition of a "hit" to include shows with lower numbers. But don't forget there are a few other factors that are important. Among them is the cost of producing the show - a "Street Smarts" can survive with numbers that would put a "Family Feud", a "Pyramid" or especially a "Hollywood Squares" so deep onto death row that even the Governator couldn't issue a reprieve. Plus, there's the "d word" - demographics. Ad sales depend on "who" as well as "how many" are thought to be watching. And an argument is made by some numbers crunchers for considering how a show is "trending". The newest syndie numbers below indicate that "Feud" has gained viewership over last year, while "Squares" has lost audience.

Over the past few years another pair of factors seem to have become more prominent than ever in determining renewals - what else the distributor has in the pipeline and the battle for timeslots. For example, "Family Feud" survives partially because Tribune has no big pending show, while "Pyramid" is banished for the next big thing up Sony's sleeve. The fate of "Squares" was also impacted by the roll-out of another show carrying big expectations.

Here's the latest:
Wheel of Fortune: 9.1 (+ 1), Jeopardy: 7.1 (- 1), Who Wants to Be a Millionaire: 3.7 (+32), Family Feud: 2.6 (+24), Pyramid: 2.3 (+10), Hollywood Squares: 2.1 (-16), Blind Date: 1.8 (-11), ElimiDate: 1.6 (-16), Street Smarts: 1.4 (- 7), Extreme Dating: 1.2, The 5th Wheel: 1.1 (-31)

Yes, the methodology behind these ratings is terribly flawed, but there is a memorable quote that pokes fun on the industry's reliance on them: "It's like navigating New Hampshire with a map of Vermont. It's the only map you have, so you use it."


Randy
tvrandywest.com

[uncamark]

[quote name=\'calliaume\' date=\'Feb 5 2004, 10:34 AM\'][quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Feb 5 2004, 09:19 AM\'] Have to wonder what the ratings universe will look like twenty or thirty years from now.  Will the top shows get maybe a five or six rating? The numbers the networks collect on Friday and Saturday now may look downright robust in the zillion-channel universe. [/quote]
Of course, by that time TV Guide will be an inch and a half thick each week, and we'll have The Card Sharks Channel, Go! Network, NG/DG Zone, and Hot Potato World.

And the message board for The Price Is Right Channel will still contain speculation on when Barker will retire.[/quote]
Wouldn't the BarkerBot 2010've taken over by then?  

"Just--look--at--these--beeeee-YEW-ti-ful--prizes [beep]..."