Quite simply, the teenage girl demographic is too small a group. Why they are dropping WWE is because the viewers of that are not watching the girlie stuff and vice versa. WWE draws a bigger demographic it seems. Why not go with what works?

I think to an extent depending on digital subchannels in many markets instead of offering the network to existing stations also shot CW in the foot. They can’t air HD through subchannels at all, the network ends up on a sub-200 channel on cable systems with a shopping channel or a very old show leading into the CW instead of high-quality reruns, and unless they’re lucky, don’t get carried on the dishes. They thought way too much of their image in branding the network before they got to thinking about how the network was carried, and without Gilmore Girls and Veronica Mars has pretty much lost any tanglible link to the WB and UPN.

Also, it’s never a good sign when one of the CW partners brings back the old WB as a streaming service. I won’t be surprised if TheWB.com lasts much longer than the CW does.

If it was the difference between 2 million and 8 million total viewers, I think your logic is probably sound. The CW let one of its highest rated shows Friday Night smackdown get away. It routinely does better than 4 million viewers but apparently most of them are middle aged men like me

Gossip Girl? Gag.

Reaper.

I am so sick of being beat over the head with this show by the CW. I would not watch it for all the tea in China. And I am smack in the middle of their target demo.

But I also have no doubt about this: neither will happen. Barry Bonds will play on no team run by Peter McGowan, and Jericho will air on no network where Les Moonves is the ultimate boss.

I suspect that it really doesn’t help much financially and that’s a huge problem if the show is really an internet phenom.

If especially younger viewers are getting more and more of their video via the Internet for it’s “on demand” capabilities and you have a show targeted at young people and you can’t monetize any of the internet viewing…that’s a problem.

It’s impossible for us to scope the true size of the show’s Internet appeal. But anecdotally it seems loved from Soho to Singapore.

And before someone gives me a moral lecture about “questionable” downloads, let me just say this: it’s the CW’s fault, they’re the ones who pulled the streams off their website. They could have gotten some ad revenue from me, but they chose not to.

Which brings me to why I write this here: Everyone is talking about what a huge internet phenomenon this series is, so pulling the show from their website makes no sense whatsoever. I can draw only two conclusions:
1.) The CW have no idea what they’re doing.

2.) Being an internet phenomenon does not help the CW one bit financially, all the big bucks are still made with live viewers – which this show doesn’t have.

Thanks for reading my rather long-ish rant.

It does mean I’ll have to go back to my pirating ways when Weeds and Dexter start up, but other than that I’m being 100% legal in my non-TV watching on TV ways!

For me, a 27 y/o male (prime demo for advertisers), the only show that I make it an absolute point to watch live is Lost. The rest – Ugly Betty, The Office, The Amazing Race, Desperate Housewives, Brothers and Sister & HIMYM, if I manage to see them live, great, if not, I can just download them and watch them later. Up in Canada, the US nets have blocked access to their streaming sites (to the ridiculous point that I can’t even watch SNL CLIPS on NBC’s website), and the Canadian nets steam a few shows, but mostly cable ones that I don’t watch. The result? TV Links or download. I’m cutting my cable after the tv season and getting rid of it all together. $40 a month for Lost? Not worth it.