8x1~ The Future in the Past Ratings

Wasn;t really sure where to put this, but I thought it would be interesting to look at the ratings for last night. Wonder how Bones will fit into the mix?

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/09/11/tv-ratings-monday-the-voice-premieres-down-the-new-normal/148152/

Clearly Bones will not beat The Voice. Honestly I don't know what else they will have for competition, my DVR is already at it's limit for Mondays (Alphas/Bones at 8, Warehouse 13/The Mob Doctor at 9 and Castle at 10). Also, I won't be able to watch anything live, my boys have football practices til 8, and by the time things settle down it's usually 9:30 or so. I highly doubt I'm the only person in that position, that pretty much shows with ratings down across the board. So while I expect ratings to be fairly high for the premiere, I would guess more and more shows will be DVR'ed especially in the coming weeks after the buzz of the premieres have died down. Also, due to these reasons, logically, the earlier shows will have lower ratings while the later shows will likely have higher ratings. That is a lot for the networks to take into consideration and why the Nielsen system needs to be majorly revamped.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/09/18/tv-ratings-monday-the-revolution-premieres-big-the-mob-doctor-doa-the-voice-rises-bones-premieres-down/148980/


8:00 NBC The Voice (8-10PM) 4.6/12 13.36
FOX Bones (Premiere) 2.3/6 7.82
ABC CMA Music Festival: Country's Night to Rock (8-11PM) 1.7/4 6.22
CBS How I Met Your Mother - R 1.4/4 4.29
CW The L.A. Complex 0.4/1 0.81


9:00 CBS 2 Broke Girls - R 1.6/4 4.91
FOX The Mob Doctor (Premiere) 1.5/4 5.09
CW The L.A. Complex 0.2/1 0.54

10:00 NBC Revolution (Premiere) 4.1/11 11.65
CBS Hawaii Five-0 - R 0.9/2 4.39

http://www.tvmediainsights.com/forum/?mingleforumaction=viewtopic&t=2344

8:00PM – Bones (Season Premiere) Viewers: 7.637 million, A18-49: 2.2/6
8:30PM – Bones (Season Premiere) Viewers: 8.001 million, A18-49: 2.4/6

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/tv-ratings-voice-revolution-premiere-mob-doctor-371149

Bones, back on Mondays, was short of 2011's Thursday premiere but up from its lower-rated spring average. The eighth season of the Fox procedural pulled a 2.3 rating among adults 18-49, up 21 percent from the last finale and 10 percent north of its spring average.

I was hoping it would do better, but The Voice is really a killer!

The Voice did extremely well, and next week should be the true test with DWTS and the CBS comedy block premiering.....

Will see. The good news for HH is that the Mob Doctor bombed.

@recoveredbonesaddic...I was surprised about that as MD was so heavily promoted. Did you mean good news because it will not take the place of Bones next season?

geraghtyvl wrote:

@recoveredbonesaddic...I was surprised about that as MD was so heavily promoted. Did you mean good news because it will not take the place of Bones next season?

Yes.... Bones is without a doubt now on its last legs, but Fox has nothing on tap to replace it.

Looking at the state of Fox this early in the season, I'm betting that none of their freshman shows make that much of an impact. Also this is the last season of Fringe, and Fox is in serious need of a hit.

Other than AI, Fox has the Sunday animation block, Glee, and New Girl going for it.

XFactor is in trouble. The salaries they are paying the judges and the ratings (below a 3.0) can not justify another season pickup.

I believe next week Bones will be down into the low 7s in viewers and around a 1.9 in the demo. Next week the CBS comedies (Partners being the weak link at 8:30), DWTS, and the CW shows launch their premieres. DWTS will take away viewers, and the CBS/CW shows will take away tenths in the demo. Those numbers, however, will still be better than anything else Fox has. This is why I predict even if the show continues to drop each week it still could be renewed.

The only real worry for Bones is the costs of production (salaries) continue to rise. With lower ratings, Fox will be getting less commercial revenue for each episode. It then is just pure economics and what is Fox acceptable return on the show. Gordon Ramsey's Master Chef generated somewhat higher numbers than Bones over the summer, and it costs much less to produce. If Fox is hurting, they could just bring in another iteration of Ramsey's show and even at a lower rating it could still generate higher revenues than Bones.

@recoveredbonesaddict I don't quite understand the whole ratings thing. I do think that they should find a better way to collect them though. It doesn't look quite that accurate to me. It's a really tough time slot for Bones. I'm hoping for season 9. Doesn't Fox make tons of $ from the TNT reruns? That could certainly be an incentive for season 9.

The studio has already given the go ahead for S9, so as long as ED and DB re-up, and numbers stay steady, S9 will happen.

As far as ratings, they did ok. Down from last season's premiere? Yeah-but last season had the AI lead in. Up from the finale with no lead in is a good thing. No one is expecting Bones to win the night, it would be foolish to think that. Should we expect a drop in the coming weeks? Absolutely. Does that mean the show is doomed? No.

I could be dead wrong, but I think the network does look at things other than strictly numbers. They almost have to as week as the ratings system is right now. Not every household is a Neilsen household. DVR, Hulu, iTunes sales all contribute. Plus, social media. For example, as of a few weeks ago, Bones had 11 million "likes" on Facebook. Imagine if all 11 million people watched live and owned Nielsen boxes.

For a show in it's 8th season to remain consistent is a good thing. The bigger issue is the network as a whole. Fox has nothing to replace Bones on the schedule. So what can they do?

geraghtyvl wrote:

@recoveredbonesaddict I don't quite understand the whole ratings thing. I do think that they should find a better way to collect them though. It doesn't look quite that accurate to me. It's a really tough time slot for Bones. I'm hoping for season 9. Doesn't Fox make tons of $ from the TNT reruns? That could certainly be an incentive for season 9.

Fox does make money from syndication, and it is what has kept the show afloat.

The question is how much money the show rakes in per episode. For example,

In an hour drama, there is usually about 42 minutes of show and 18 minutes of commercials. Of those 18 Minutes, the local stations usually get 30 Sec to promote their nightly newscast or other local shows. The network will use another minute to promote its shows. What you have left is roughly 16 minutes in which the network is able to generate revenue.

What ratings do is help advertisers and networks determine the value for an ad that will run during said show. Usually those rates are determined before the season starts. Bones rates were determined by last year final run of episodes and how well Fox performed in general.

The key here is that advertisers are looking for shows that meet their target market, but above all they want shows that hit the coveted demo of 18-49. The premise is that the people on this demo have not established any brand preference and that through advertising you will get them to buy your product. As you get older, advertisers believe you develop brand preference, and it is therefore not likely that you will change brands. You also are more likely to watch TV than younger viewers because younger viewers have more things going on with their lives. Thus they pay a premium to reach those younger viewers.

If I remember, Bones ad rate per 30 second spot was $140k. If Fox only has 16 minutes of commercial time available, Fox can sell 32 30-second spots. 32X140k equals roughly 4.48M per episode revenue.

The tricky part is figuring out how much the show actually costs to produce, but the guess is that for an hour drama broadcast in prime time the cost is about 3.5M on average. The older the show, the higher it costs to produce. This is mainly because salaries for the stars and producers. If I were a betting man, I would say that Bones is at the high end of production costs (about the mid 4 million).

Clearly at this stage in Bones' life, the cost to produce is about equal to the money generated from selling ads. What keeps it afloat is the syndication money which brings about a million per episode.

The concern with the ratings is this, the $140K rate from last year was determined when Bones was getting demo ratings in the high 2s and low 3s. I do not know the current rate, but I will bet that the rate is much lower than $140K. If it is $130K, the show's revenue drops by $320K per episode. If it drops to $120K, the loss in revenue is $640K. You can see the problem. The one million from syndication that was keeping the show afloat last year has to make up for the loss in revenue.

MI_Bonesgirl wrote:

The studio has already given the go ahead for S9, so as long as ED and DB re-up, and numbers stay steady, S9 will happen.

No, they haven't. Fox Studios is not the same as Fox Network. They are two distinct business enterprises within News Corp. Each has separate profit targets and for all intents act as independent businesses. Where the relationship counts is on the licensing fees (what Fox Studios charges Fox Network) and the syndication money which goes to News Corp's bottom line. Fox Network, however, does not have to keep airing Bones if it can find an alternative that can generate as much revenue as Bones does.

Quote :

The bigger issue is the network as a whole. Fox has nothing to replace Bones on the schedule. So what can they do?

Exactly.... Bones is okay as long as the network continues to falter, but like I said in my earlier posts Master Chef generates similar numbers and it costs a lot less to produce. The key for renewal is going to be the show ability to generate revenue given the lower ratings versus the higher cost to produce due to escalating salaries (remember everyone got a raise last year).

My guess is that DB and ED will be asked to take a paycut if they want to go another season./

This was what I meant about having the go ahead for S9 if ratings stay steady and ED and DB are on board:

'According to a Fox rep, “FOX struck a license deal for BONES for 2 years, but with an option on the second year.” So, if BONES does well and the network wants it to continue on, Fox can pick it up simply, versus having to negotiate with the studio all over again. Not quite a slam-dunk renewal, but certainly a step in the right direction'

MI_Bonesgirl wrote:

This was what I meant about having the go ahead for S9 if ratings stay steady and ED and DB are on board:

'According to a Fox rep, “FOX struck a license deal for BONES for 2 years, but with an option on the second year.” So, if BONES does well and the network wants it to continue on, Fox can pick it up simply, versus having to negotiate with the studio all over again. Not quite a slam-dunk renewal, but certainly a step in the right direction'

Got it....

So, I interpret that as unless Bones takes a total nosedive in ratings, and/or they are not able to come to contract agreements with David, or Emily, or both, then the show will be back.
Fox seems pretty lenient with their veteran shows. Fringe is a prime example of that. Don't get me wrong, I love Fringe, but if numbers were the primary concern they would have been gone a couple years ago.

recoveredbonesaddict wrote:

MI_Bonesgirl wrote:

The studio has already given the go ahead for S9, so as long as ED and DB re-up, and numbers stay steady, S9 will happen.

No, they haven't. Fox Studios is not the same as Fox Network. They are two distinct business enterprises within News Corp. Each has separate profit targets and for all intents act as independent businesses. Where the relationship counts is on the licensing fees (what Fox Studios charges Fox Network) and the syndication money which goes to News Corp's bottom line. Fox Network, however, does not have to keep airing Bones if it can find an alternative that can generate as much revenue as Bones does.

Quote :

The bigger issue is the network as a whole. Fox has nothing to replace Bones on the schedule. So what can they do?

Exactly.... Bones is okay as long as the network continues to falter, but like I said in my earlier posts Master Chef generates similar numbers and it costs a lot less to produce. The key for renewal is going to be the show ability to generate revenue given the lower ratings versus the higher cost to produce due to escalating salaries (remember everyone got a raise last year).

My guess is that DB and ED will be asked to take a paycut if they want to go another season./

Hey recovered, Even though I disagree with you mostly, I still admire you for your knowledge about the ratings system. Now this JMO, but there is NO WAY that David and Emily are going to take pay cuts to continue with the show.

@thebeaver 1965: something is very wrong with your post. Please correct it or tell me what are your words and what are quotes.

Mereva, Sorry, I messed up somehow. What I was trying to say to Recovered was although I disagree with Recovered most of the time, I still admire his/her knowledge of the rating system. I also said in my opinion David and Emily would absolutely not take a PAY CUT to remain with the show. On the contrary, I think they both would want raises. That is what I think, but IDK anything.

thebeaver 1965 wrote:

Mereva, Sorry, I messed up somehow. What I was trying to say to Recovered was although I disagree with Recovered most of the time, I still admire his/her knowledge of the rating system. I also said in my opinion David and Emily would absolutely not take a PAY CUT to remain with the show. On the contrary, I think they both would want raises. That is what I think, but IDK anything.

Haha Beav... I'm pretty sure your man will not be taking a pay cut. He might just agree to an extension of his current contract or a greater say so behind the scenes, less airtime and more directorial duties. ED's renewal will depend on whether she wants to go for a second child next year, but I also don't see her wanting a pay cut either.

Pay for the big stars is the biggest problem with older shows being renewed or not, and right now the mood in the industry is to ask the big stars to take a cut. I believe Hugh Lawrie was asked as were most of the cast of House.

Finals.... No change in demo. Viewers up slightly


http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/09/18/monday-final-ratings-the-voice-adjusted-up-cma-music-festival-adjusted-down/149000/


Time Net Show 18-49 Rtg/Shr Viewers (millions)
8:00 NBC The Voice (8-10PM) 4.7/12 13.57
FOX Bones (Premiere) 2.3/7 7.98
ABC CMA Music Festival: Country's Night to Rock (8-11PM) 1.5/4 5.66
CBS How I Met Your Mother - R 1.4/4 4.18
CW The L.A. Complex 0.4/1 0.74

9:00 CBS 2 Broke Girls - R 1.6/4 4.89
FOX The Mob Doctor (Premiere) 1.5/4 5.11
CW The L.A. Complex 0.2/1 0.52

10:00 NBC Revolution (Premiere) 4.1/11 11.65
CBS Hawaii Five-0 - R 0.9/2 4.44

Hey recovered, this might be a dumb question but Bones got 2.3/7, what does the 7 mean and why is that number different between the shows-why do some shows have a higher number in that 7 spot while some are lower?

thebeaver 1965 wrote:

Mereva, Sorry, I messed up somehow. What I was trying to say to Recovered was although I disagree with Recovered most of the time, I still admire his/her knowledge of the rating system. I also said in my opinion David and Emily would absolutely not take a PAY CUT to remain with the show. On the contrary, I think they both would want raises. That is what I think, but IDK anything.

Aha, thanks! I corrected html code in your message, it seems to be ok now.

MI_Bonesgirl wrote:

Hey recovered, this might be a dumb question but Bones got 2.3/7, what does the 7 mean and why is that number different between the shows-why do some shows have a higher number in that 7 spot while some are lower?

From TVBTN,

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/09/02/whats-a-tv-rating-and-who-is-it-dating-2012-13-edition/147028/

The first Number is the Nielsen TV rating. It is merely a percentage of whatever population is being measured.

Quote :

If you see a 3.4 national adults 18-49 rating, that doesn't mean 3.4 million adults 18-49, it just means 3.4 percent of the 126,540,000 adults 18-49 in the United States who live in a household with a television were watching based on the Nielsen estimates for the 2012-13 television season.

So a 2.3 adults 18-49 rating works out to be around 2.91 million adults between 18-49. The rest of the viewers fall outside the advertising demo (too old or too young).

The second number is the Nielsen TV Household share. It measures the percentage of television sets in use tuned to the program.

Quote :

In 2012, Nielsen states that there are 114.2 Million households with televisions in the US.

This number, however, does not actually represent the total number of households watching television at any given time. The number varies by hour. Normally more Households have their TV sets on at 9PM than they do at 8PM, and more Households are watching at 8Pm than at 10PM. Therefore a 7 share at 9PM is not the same as a 7 share at 8PM.

It could be the case that at 8PM only 95M households were watching TV at that time. Thus a 7 share implies that 6.65M households who were watching television at that time were watching your show. If at 9PM the number of households watching television went up to say 100M, a 7 share would indicate that 7M households watching television at that time were watching your show. There is a difference of nearly .35M househods between the two measurements.

Rating reflects the percentage of the total population being measure tuned to a particular program while share reflects the percentage of televisions actually in use.

Thanks!