Comments on: Monday Night Ratings Data: CW Spin

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:47:29 +0000

Bob, to Julia’s point the networks (and Nielsen) are spending lots of money and doing a lot of research to basically show that DVR ads are still effective. Moreover, although *we* do not see it, Nielsen measures and reports commercial viewing number for live viewing and three days worth of DVR viewing. Unfortunately we do not see this data so we can’t compare live commercial viewing with the Live+3 days of DVR viewing…

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:44:26 +0000

SG Fan, you may be right, but I have no illusions that the 23 million was an average that streamed the whole show. I’d expect it’s total streams of any length and that the number who watch the whole show is *significantly* less than 1.3 million per episode (at least via CW’s own site).

By: Julia

Julia — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:42:39 +0000

Bob, while CW’s whining is not smart, advertisers do care about DVR watchers. Tie ins and product placements and other forms of advertising that aren’t straight commercials do depend on all viewers, including DVR.

By: bob

bob — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:34:40 +0000

ok, i have DVR’d shows before. i have downloaded them from itunes. i dont watch commercails. why would anybody? doesnt neilson exist to help advertisers on where to put there commercails? why would the advertisers care about DVR if no one watches the commercails on them. thats why neilson doesnt show them!!! theres no point! CW, you need to think. o wait you never have thought in the first place, thats why no one watches your stupid network!!!

By: SG GG fan

SG GG fan — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:29:53 +0000

I’m fairly sure 23 million refers to full-length episodes and what’s there to be surprised about?

23,000,000 / 18 = 1,300,000 streams per episode (clearly there’s nothing much to brag about here)

Honestly, I would have expected more. =S

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:05:42 +0000

Troy, such streaming data without further information is practically worthless. Average time per stream (total minutes) is key, and those numbers may (or may not) include streaming for clips, interviews etc. By itself though, it’s a useless metric (other than it looks like a big number)

By: Julia

Julia — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:02:19 +0000

I find that very hard to believe, Troy. Why would they only mention it now, and not in their usual, overblown press release type way?

By: Troy

Troy — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:59:51 +0000

Entertainment Weekly reported on Gossip Girl’s streaming in the September 12 issue: “The CW says that Girl . . . also had 23 million streams on CWTV.com during season 1.”

By: Julia

Julia — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:58:25 +0000

You know, I think we all expect these sorts of excuses from the rabid fans on the net, but from the president of the network? Who is supposed to be knowledgeable about the business? That’s just pathetic really.

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:47:16 +0000

Nice linking.

Perhaps CW wants Nielsen to report all the bit torrent downloads and illegal streaming sites that have advertising removed!?

The CW knows EXACTLY how many people pay for it on iTunes and watch via the CW’s own site so if those numbers are really any good, let the CW REPORT them!

By: Guess Who

Guess Who — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:41:15 +0000

CW blames its low rating woes on Nielsen.

http://www.syfyportal.com/news425351.html

Gee, maybe if they didnt focus so much on an extremely narrow segment of the viewing audience they might get more viewers. Im just sayin’