Every once in awhile I find myself going over to the TrekBBS to read some posts. Once I get through the tons of the more inane, ridiculous posts, I sometimes come across one or two that are actually intelligent & coherent.
The other day I came across a post asking about Enterprise's ratings. Although most of the people didn't really have much info about this, I was wondering if perhaps someone here could enlighten me. Here's my question:
I have a friend who works for an advertizing agency in Washington, DC. I asked him how Enterprise's ratings were. He told me that in comparison to the major networks, Enterprise was at the very bottom. But in relation to other UPN shows, it was on top. So does this actually mean that a show which basically nobody is watching (in relation to the network shows) can literally stay on the air for seven years just because it's on UPN?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Enterprise is ratings-proof, because it has a built-in audience, does well demographically, and sells widgets and doodads. It's also going to attract media attention to a much greater degree than anything else the network could put on, because Star Trek is enough of a cultural phenomenon even today to warrant the coverage from things like Entertainment Weekly or what have you.
It isn't, incidently, consistently at the bottom of the heap. (Though, of course, being on UPN, and thus having a smaller market penetration, it is close to it.)
From time to time, the Sci-Fi Channel news service will put up ratings for a number of different SF/F shows, (even ones vaguely related, and there isn't much consistency [some weeks Alias is on it, some weeks it isn't, etc.]). I was trying to keep track for awhile.
Anyway, of the little networks, which constitute UPN and Warner Bros., mostly (Fox is too big, I think, though their SF/F shows haven't really been outperforming the competition. And Pax isn't even worthy of my attention.), the highest rated program (which almost never gets above a 4.0) tends to rotate between Buffy, Enterprise, and Smallville.
Of course, my record stops just before the end of the first season, so I couldn't tell you how Enterprise is performing this year.
But, as I said, in this case, the raw numbers aren't what's really important to the networks. Consider how much of a cultural phenomenon something like the Sopranos is, despite the fact that even the worst post-Friends show that no one ever talked about had more viewers.
In my next post, Firefly!
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
IMO, the reason for the "bottom" ratings is the fact that UPN is a cut-rate network pretender. Paramount is satisfied enough with the results, but won't do anything whenever their shows get slammed in the Nielsen reports.
Not that any of the recent Trek shows would turn out any better on another network, probably -- because none of the *real* national networks have any real stake in Trek and therefore wouldn't give it the attention necessary to really make it succeed. And the syndication market has dried up since everyone jumped on the bandwagon after TNG.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Incidently, their most recent genre ratings, and Enterprise is indeed at the bottom of the heap. Note that quality appears to have little to do with it, if the most-watched show on the list tells us anything.
SHOW HHR Touched by an Angel 5.3 Smallville 4.8 Alias 4.4 John Doe 3.9 Buffy 3.0 Firefly 2.9 Birds of Prey 2.8 Angel 2.6 Charmed 2.6 Enterprise 2.5
I don't know what shows were showing new episodes and which were showing reruns that week, though, which seems like it would be important.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
You know what's really sad? "Enterprise" is doing even worse than "Firefly" and "Andromeda," but it's still perceived as the strongest show for some reason...
Posted by Obi Juan (Member # 90) on :
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: And the syndication market has dried up since everyone jumped on the bandwagon after TNG.
The syndication market that TNG created in the first place!
How many successful non-tabloid new-syndicated shows were there before TNG? ZERO
In the 80s (before 87 anyway) syndicated = crap. We're talking very low budget sitcoms that could only get aired early Sunday morning right after Dr. Landow finished discussing yeast infections for a half hour. Such hits as The New Monkees, The New Leave it to Beaver, and Harry and the Hendersons.
Oh yeah, I thought TNG was going to be a real winner when I heard it was going to be syndicated.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
(I should add that a good 90% of the people online who attempt to draw broad conclusions from the ratings do so in a terribly hamfisted fashion and have zero knowledge of how the entertainment industry works. Basically, the easiest policy to follow about drawing firm conclusions from ratings is don't.)
Obi: It should be added that syndication has very rapidly shifted back to being solely a place where TV shows are made for the purpose of being stuffed in as stopgaps on Saturday nights and Sunday afternoons. With the obvious exception of DS9, I doubt anything syndicated since 1994 could really be seen as intended as compelling drama.
Posted by The Mike from C.A.P.T.A.I.N. (Member # 709) on :
even though i think the show is drek, and dont watch it anymore, do you realize how much cash i've shelled out on ENT related items? they're making their money on phase pistols, hats magazines and the like.
i even bought the novels, on the hopes that even though the show was shitty, the novels might have some redeeming value.. the novels are 3 or 4 times shittier than the show. they even have cheap typesetting, proofreading and spellchecking, something i thought wouldn't be an issue to a publishing giant like simon/schuster and a licensing giant like paramount.
but guess what: they're cheating people out of cash, ratings (and quality) don't matter
the suits do look cool though.. my captain's togs get all the chicks at parties. or at least two at a time, but who needs more?
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
Well I've stopped watching Enterprise but I do occasionally have friends tell me interesting tidbits about how the red alert thing came about. Still, I'd rather spend money on the TNG era or the TOS era of Star Trek than on Enterprise era stuff.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
What kind of ratings did DS9 get?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Well Emissary was the highest rating pilot episode of all time when it was aired. Then they dropped a little, then a little more, then a little more, picked up a bit, then dropped, stayed same, stayed same. Roughly (for the seven seasons)
Andrew
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mike from C.A.P.T.A.I.N.: ibut guess what: they're cheating people out of cash, ratings (and quality) don't matter.
Yes, damn them for kidnapping your family, locking them in a room and then threatening to shoot them in the head unless you buy The Newest Crossover Series Of Novels Where The Captains Get Together And Eat The Defiant. Or whatever.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
I'll never forgive the producers... for the death of my boy.
Posted by Kosh (Member # 167) on :
quote: What kind of ratings did DS9 get?
I think it averaged somewhere around 5.0 for most of it's run. Hercules and Xena did about the same, till Herc went off, then Xena's rateings dropped.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Personally from what I can see now and then, I like it. For the most part, it's not the general public getting turned off, but the Trekkie fans...
Posted by NightWing (Member # 4) on :
Birds of Prey got canceled because it had bad ratings, and it's above Enterprise Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
Bird of Prey was the = suk.
Posted by NightWing (Member # 4) on :
And Enterprise managed to get below even that... That's why I'm so surprised...
Posted by The Mike from C.A.P.T.A.I.N. (Member # 709) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: Yes, damn them for kidnapping your family, locking them in a room and then threatening to shoot them in the head unless you buy The Newest Crossover Series Of Novels Where The Captains Get Together And Eat The Defiant. Or whatever.
That's not what happened.
I saw the Enterprise books, and i looked at the covers and they looked like good books. Imagine my surprise when I found they hadn't even been proofread!
They looked like good books! The covers were good! That's how you're supposed to tell, right? by the covers?
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: I'll never forgive the producers... for the death of my boy.
That's my line, d00d..
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by NightWing: Birds of Prey got canceled because it had bad ratings, and it's above Enterprise
There are many, many reasons why shows get cancelled. Audience demographic, desirability of advert breaks, merchandising, costs of making the show, monkey eating, and more.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
quote:Originally posted by NightWing: Birds of Prey got canceled...
Finally making way for that Klingon sit-com with the same title which will get cancelled after half an episode.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:They looked like good books! The covers were good! That's how you're supposed to tell, right? by the covers?
Being an avid reader of Star Trek novels myself, I can honestly say that these days, Star Trek novel cover art is about as dull as that show with the NX-01. Almost every novel's cover is just a painting of one or more of the crew members, mostly in a pose they took for a publicity photo.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
actually its worse than that: All of the novels this year have had Very Bad Photoshop work done on their covers. The Enterprise novel What Price Honor has an image of Reed from his publicity photo, with the colors skewed off of true somehow (and looking pretty pixelated at that) with the bridge in the background, also with bad color adjustment.
The rest of the novels seem to be using the basic Photoshop filters, but so poorly that it looks like a child made them.
The worst part is when they combine to Pshop plugins to make a bizarre looking distorted image (Mission Gamma, Janus Gate)
really awful stuff.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
I agree. Cover art these days is just absolutely awful. However, I still have fond memories of the older novels with the Boris Vallejo cover art. Vallejo actually based his cover art on *gasp* the actual novel's story, and the fictional characters therein, instead of just one of the main cast. His version of the Federation class dreadnought from the "Dreadnought!" book was simply amazing. He must have been a fan of FJ. And my hands-down favorite cover: Krenn playing chess with the boy Spock while an unknown Vulcan/Romulan/Tharavul looks disapprovingly on, from "The Final Reflection."
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
"Time For Yesterday"--Zar riding out of the Guardian of Forever as Spock stands off to the side. Yes.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
even when the novels actually had the balls to paint new pictures of the characters.. like Hamesaad Dreen on the cover of 'Legacy' or Joanna McCoy on 'Crisis on Centaurus'. nowaday they just repackage publicity garbage for us, by an artist whose education level in photoshop is about the same as my cat's...
Posted by Obi Juan (Member # 90) on :
We have a cat in our art department. He's really quite good. If only they didn't have to replace his mouse every week...
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
That's the problem with cover art these days...(at least for the ST novels)...the artist just makes random paintings, which have absolutely nothing to do with the story inside the book. Plus the artwok is just bad. I have a mind to contact Pocket Books and complain, just to see what they'd tell me.
There's a trilogy by Frederick Pohl called "The Other End of Time." They're absolutely excellent books, about a group of aliens who want humans to join their "Federation," & fight with them against another alien race, but it turns out that their enemy is actually the good guys. (There's much more to it than that, but that's the gist of the plot).
However, the cover artist apparently never bothered to actually read the book he was making the art for, because the paintings had nothing to do with the story. I think many Sci-fi books have this problem.
Posted by Commander Dan (Member # 558) on :
quote:Originally posted by Matrix: For the most part, it's not the general public getting turned off, but the Trekkie fans...
Interesting comment. If that is the case, then that would mean the end of a “built-in audience.” No?
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
I wonder what kept Star Trek afloat after TNG went off the air? I think it was the 'built-in' audience along with a handdul of people who just can't find any better on.
Take away the Trekkies in Star Trek, what do you have?
Posted by E. Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Hoards and hoards of casual fans.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Just like Nemesis right? I saw lots of casual fans wanting to go see that movie. If Trekkies don't like Trek, I can tell you that casual fans will not either. Especially if Trekkies are starting to look for other things to do than watch Star Trek.
Posted by E. Cartman (Member # 256) on :
I submit that it's the other way around. Casual fans have fewer reasons to be disenchanted, because they don't care (not as much as diehards might, anyway) about frivolous extraneous details. There's simply less to detriment their enjoyment.
Mind you, Nemesis suffers from flaws that are hard to overlook no matter which camp you're in, but Trekkie audiences are, on the whole, more attentive to them.
[ February 08, 2003, 08:06 AM: Message edited by: E. Cartman ]
Posted by Kosh (Member # 167) on :
quote:Originally posted by E. Cartman: I submit that it's the other way around. Casual fans have fewer reasons to be disenchanted, because they don't care (not as much as diehards might, anyway) about frivolous extraneous details. There's simply less to detriment their enjoyment.
Mind you, Nemesis suffers from flaws that are hard to overlook no matter which camp you're in, but Trekkie audiences are, on the whole, more attentive to them.
The only problem there is the opening day, word of mouth. If Trekies don't like the film, and that is the opinion spread around during opening weekend, then it could affect the casual veiwer ticket sales.
I didn't go because I didn't like Insurrection. I'm tired of wasting money for films I don't like. I will probably rent it when it comes out, since it's less then the price of a ticket, and dinner out and popcorn and soda...
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)