NBC Is Beating the Crap Out of ABC Now

TV Arts

Just as I predicted would happen at about this time after the departure
of Dancing with the Stars and Lost.  Here's what we have so far with
nightly averages this week:

MON: ABC 6.8 - NBC 8.2
TUE: ABC 5.8 - NBC 6.8
WED: ABC 4.6 - NBC 5.9

3-Night Average:
ABC 5.7 - NBC 6.9

Now that it's Thursday, ABC is expected to narrow that considerably
with Ugly Betty and Grey's Anatomy, but then NBC comes out swinging
again Friday when it generally does better than ABC, and how well
either network will ultimately do for the week will depend on the
football games, although ABC may be weakened somewhat by repeat
episodes slated on Sunday for Desperate Housewives and Brothers &
Sisters.  Personally, I think ABC has already lost second place for
this season since not even a return of Lost in February will help the
network recover from the miscalcualtion of programming they've done by
unloading both it and Dancing for the next couple of months.
Thursday:  Ugly Betty, Grey's Anatomy & Men in Trees

Woohoo! Soap night
Thursday: EARL, THE OFFICE, and 30 ROCK. TV's Best Comedies.

dunno about 30 Rock as I haven't watched it...but no argument about the
other 3.  They are all on my "Must See" weekly list.  Last nights
"Earl" got the most laughs....Joy stole the show!  Somehow I don't see
the ABC lineup keeping the demo the networks want, even though I did
record Betty (no interest in that Scrubs ripoff "Greys Anatomy" and
only watched one episode of Men In Trees).
[email protected] (Seerialmom) 
Last nights "Earl" got the most laughs....Joy stole the show! No
interest in that Scrubs ripoff "Greys Anatomy" and only watched one
episode of Men In Trees.
But CBS still rules most if not all!!
[email protected] 
But CBS still rules most if not all!!
No problem there.  It is universally know, CBS shows are mostly watched
by old people that advertisers don't really care for.  It's all about
money.  Which is why "Grey's Anatomy" & "Desperate Housewives" can
command a lot more in dollars than CSI.  Or even "Heroes" can command
more money than CSI.

1. 	Desperate Housewives 	ABC 	8.5
2. 	Grey's Anatomy 	ABC 	7.6
3. 	Heroes 	NBC 	6.9
4. 	House 	FOX 	6.4
5. 	CSI: Miami 	CBS 	6.0
6. 	Sunday Night Football 	NBC 	5.9
T7. 	CSI: Crime Scene Investigation 	CBS 	5.2

Ok, here's the numbers for 25-54.  ABC still come up tops.

1. 	Desperate Housewives 	ABC 	9.9
2. 	Grey's Anatomy 	ABC 	8.1
3. 	Heroes 	NBC 	7.6
4. 	CSI: Miami 	CBS 	7.3
5. 	House 	FOX 	6.8
6. 	CSI: Crime Scene Investigation 	CBS 	6.6
7. 	Sunday Night Football 	NBC 	6.5
8. 	Extreme Makeover: Home Edition 	ABC 	6.0
9. 	Two and a Half Men 	CBS 	5.9
10. 	Deal or No Deal (Mon.) 	NBC 	5.8

1. 	Desperate Housewives 	ABC 	8.5
2. 	Grey's Anatomy 	ABC 	7.6
3. 	Heroes 	NBC 	6.9
4. 	House 	FOX 	6.4
5. 	CSI: Miami 	CBS 	6.0
6. 	Sunday Night Football 	NBC 	5.9
T7. 	CSI: Crime Scene Investigation 	CBS 	5.2
T7. 	Extreme Makeover: Home Edition 	ABC 	5.2
T9. 	ER 	NBC 	5.0
T9. 	The Simpsons 	FOX 	5.0
T9. 	Saturday Night College Football 	ABC 	5.0
T9. 	Deal or No Deal (Mon.) 	NBC 	5.0

Heroes and the NFL are old people shows?

Network spin?  Advertisers have been aware of the value of younger customers 
long before TV 'spun' anything.  That young crowd has the most disposable 
income that gets pissed away on the kind of things that most advertisers 
have to sell.  Old farts are pumping money into 401(K)s, college funds, and 
expensive vacations.  That young crowd buys the  'whim' items like 
TVs/music/computers/junk food. etc...

What the hell does that even mean?


You're not making ANY sense.  First-off the term "sluggish" doesn't
mean anything.  You have not defined what the term means, or how to
recognize it.  I could just as easily label CSI as "fast" and you would
not be able to refute it.

Second, just because the ratings are high among young people, how do we
know old people ratings are high?  You have not shown us any demo for
the 45 and older crowd.

Basically, you're making statements w/o any evidence.


I didn't.  The 25-54 demos were posted *in a separate chain* from the
current one.  Same topic... different chain of replies.  So I didn't
trim anything, because they were not present in this chain.

Perhaps.  May be the result of more exposure (growing-up with 100+
channels) leads to more demanding viewers among the youngsters?  i.e.
They're no longer satisfied with simple stories, but demand more
intelligent stuff like CSI.

You just gave up any chance of sounding credible.

people living off credit cards, are spending money.  You can argue the 
semantics of it being 'disposable income', but the only thing advertisers 
care about is the fact that they are spending.

Doesn't even matter if the money all comes directly from Dad's wallet.  The 
advertiser's goal is to reach the person controlling the spending of the 
money, not the original source that does not control how it is spent.

Being pumped into cars, TVs, stereos, etc... just as fast as those yound 
wiper snappers can spend it.

Meanwhile, the old farts know that retirement and death are nipping at their 
heals so they shove all their money into 401k and once in a lifetime 
vacations rather than disposable goods and eating out.

And if you are right, you still lose the argument here because it is the 
young person that is deciding how the money is spend.  It is the young 
person that the advertisers need to reach.
--- The original source can control its output by not giving any.

The advertisers are working on the "If you get teens and 20-somethings
hooked on Irish Spring soap, they will continue buying Irish Spring for
the rest of their lives" belief system.

So it's long-term thinking.

Advertisers also believe it's pointless to get a 30 or 40-something to
switch from _____ brand soap to Irish Spring, because they are set in
their ways, and won't listen.

So it's not about teens/20-somethings having more money.
It's about their brains still-developing & not yet set in their ways.
Teens/20-somethings are more pliable & easier to change.


And to be honest, I think the theory has some merit.  It was in my 20's
that I experimented and tried different brands of soap/deodarants until
I found one I liked.  And I've continued using those brands for the
last 10 years & have no plans to change.
Advertisers like to target the younger demo, because the 25-54 crowd
contains a bunch of folks who, though they may respond to new products,
are hard to persuade about brands that they already have firm opinions
about.  Frex, if you can get a 21-year-old* to identify with the brand
of beer you make, you can create a customer for life.  That age-group
has many members who have yet to buy a car new.  They are a virgin
field for brand loyalty.  The upper-end of the 25-54 band is likelier
to have more stuff, and less likely to switch brands when they replace
the stuff they already have.


*Viewers younger than 21 are influenced by these ads, too, but when I
was a younger-than-legal drinker, the most important selling point for
booze or beer was "can we get any of it?"