Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Viewing figs down - ITV could lose £70m
03-12-2004, 10:02 AM
Post: #1
Viewing figs down - ITV could lose £70m

"A slump in viewing for the once all-conquering reality series is threatening to leave ITV with a £70 million deficit.
Viewing figures for the fourth series of the “jungle” eviction show are down by two million per episode compared with its outing in January. Critics blamed the slump on a cast-list of relative unknowns who were chosen ahead of celebrities whose notoriety would have made them more familiar to a mass audience."
Times Online full article

Is the drop in viewing figures really down to the celebrities that have been choosen, or is it like someone at ITV suggests down to David Blunkett? Huh
"An insider said: “The Blunkett affair has monopolised front pages for a week. We rely on that exposure to generate viewing.” "

Haydon

[Image: pot001.gif]jobs kent
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2004, 12:28 PM
Post: #2
Viewing figs down - ITV could lose £70m
I don't understand why low viewing figures can leave them out of pocket. Not knowing much about it at all, I thought the programs were paid for by the advertisements? I would have thought the advertisers would be the ones with the biggest reason to moan because they must have paid a lot of money for those adverts on the basis that they will reach a huge audience and if the viewing figures are down, they obviously haven't done too well.

Anyone care to explain Smile
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2004, 12:31 PM
Post: #3
Viewing figs down - ITV could lose £70m
Nancys boobs sophies bum (Zoo??? magazine?) and Joes ugly mug (Express) were all very visable on the newsstands this morning
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2004, 06:06 PM
Post: #4
Viewing figs down - ITV could lose £70m
Critique Wrote:I don't understand why low viewing figures can leave them out of pocket. Not knowing much about it at all, I thought the programs were paid for by the advertisements? I would have thought the advertisers would be the ones with the biggest reason to moan because they must have paid a lot of money for those adverts on the basis that they will reach a huge audience and if the viewing figures are down, they obviously haven't done too well.

Anyone care to explain Smile

I've always assumed they get a chunk of the telephone voting revenue. Don't know this for a fact, though.
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2004, 06:50 PM
Post: #5
Viewing figs down - ITV could lose £70m
I heard on the radio 1 news this evening that althought the viewing figures are down (to about 8 million) IAC is still pulling in more viewers than anything else that is on at the same time.
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2004, 08:00 PM
Post: #6
Viewing figs down - ITV could lose £70m
No wonder - it's boring this year. I am one of the ones who have switched off.

[SIZE="1"][COLOR="Red"]Before criticising someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
That way, you're a mile away from them and you have their shoes...[/COLOR]
[/SIZE]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2004, 09:14 PM
Post: #7
Viewing figs down - ITV could lose £70m
Maybe the Natalie (could she possibley be Gollum's twin sister) thing put people off. Her and Brian were weak characters. Definately Natalie whinging put me off.... I only started watching out when I knew she had definately gone. Was glad she got picked to do all those trials though. Reckon the other contestants would have killed her and ate her if she stayed. :devil: :laugh:
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2004, 10:54 PM
Post: #8
Viewing figs down - ITV could lose £70m
But then tonight they said that they had had the most voting for this series:unsure:
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2004, 11:14 PM
Post: #9
Viewing figs down - ITV could lose £70m
Well if the The Times has an article on it, it can't be faring that badly.

Critique, this part of the article might be relevant to your question:
"ITV was banking on the swift return to the jungle to reverse a decline in audience share across the year. The deal permitting the merger of Carlton and Granada to form a single ITV allows advertisers to withdraw their spending without financial penalties if viewing figures fall across the year."

I don't understand this:
"Critics blamed the slump on a cast-list of relative unknowns who were chosen ahead of celebrities whose notoriety would have made them more familiar to a mass audience."
I don't think the unknowns were chosen ahead of the more famous celebs, just that anyone who was even slightly famous turned it down.
Gazza is quoted as saying “They offered us good money and I said, ‘No problem, I’ll do it.’ But I think, in the end, they thought I was too famous for the show.”

What a load of baloney. He wasn't too famous, he was too expensive.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-12-2004, 12:02 AM
Post: #10
Viewing figs down - ITV could lose £70m
Thanks Nox, I was on the right lines then that it is the advertisement revenue they are worried about. I didn't realise they could withdraw and obviously if they were banking on it for the future, then I can see how it would affect their budget. I just need things spelled out to me - lol.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)