regularlyleaded January 6, 2015 Share January 6, 2015 (edited) I am not media-savvy in the least but you guys are so I ask: why is that 18-49 demographic still so coveted? It essentially comes down to what Camera One said in the previous post. Advertisers who pay the networks bill "covet" the 18-49 demographic because the 18-49 demo is considered (by the advertisers) to be the least brand loyal and hence the most likely to buy the new/different products that they (the advertisers) are selling. While the 50+ demographic, partially as a result of recent global economic factors, is *generally* more likely to be flush with money to spend, that hasn't resulted in advertisers coveting the 50+ demo in place of the 18-49 demographic. The rationale is that even though those in the 50+ demo may have more money to spend, they are far more frugal, more likely to be relying on a fixed (retirement) income (and in this day and age, more likely to still be supporting other family members while on a fixed income), and as previously mentioned, less likely to try different/new products. Advertisers aren't going to spend money to advertise to a group of people that they believe are less likely to buy their products, hence advertisers find the 50+ demo far less appealing than the 18-49 demo. Yes, you get lots of big pharma advertising as you noted, ShadowFacts, clearly geared to the 50+ demo, but note that is very specific product advertising. The advertisers know they have the audience (the 50+ demo which would be most likely interested/affected by the pharma ad) and they know that the 50+ demo also generally has the money to buy their specific product, consequently advertisers see that sort of specific product advertising a bit like shooting fish in a barrel. It's like beer commercials during sporting events -- The audience most likely to buy your product is watching, so it makes sense to pay to show those beer commercials then. In recent years, the 18-49 demo has moved away from broadcast network television to cable (HBO, AMC, A&E, etc) and to other mediums (Hulu, Netflix, YouTube, the internet in general) for various reasons (better and/or "riskier" programming that appeals to a younger audience, ability to watch what you want when you want, etc.), and as a result broadcast networks across the board have experienced a continuing, overall decline in ratings. Consequently, the advertisers have followed the 18-49 demo to these other outlets and away from the networks. Advertisers now pay more money -- money that in previous years would've been spent solely on network advertisements -- for cable and internet advertising. Advertisers haven't changed their assessment of market demographics and still covet the 18-49 demo, and since broadcast networks are essentially the advertising companies' bitches, networks covet the 18-49 demo. Edited January 6, 2015 by regularlyleaded 2 Link to comment
ShadowFacts January 6, 2015 Share January 6, 2015 Thanks, Camera One and regularlyleaded, I knew I would get some good insights. It's interesting. I never thought much about the brand loyalty/switching aspect. I like to mute my t.v. and use adblocks online, so I'm probably not a very desirable target regardless of age. I just wonder about the logic of marketing at times. Link to comment
sharky January 6, 2015 Share January 6, 2015 Not only that, but if you watch on your DVR, they'll count that as a view IF you don't fast forward through the ads. Allegedly. Nielsen hasn't been that forthcoming about how they get the DVR data, if a view without commercials also counts, and how they can tell you watched the ads. Link to comment
paulvdb January 7, 2015 Share January 7, 2015 If you are a Nielsen viewer they install special hardware in your tv and dvr that tells them exactly what channel you watch on your tv or what recorded program you are watching on your dvr. They know where the commercial breaks are in the program, so they can see if you skip the commercials on your dvr or if you change the channel when watching live. Although I guess they can't see if you go to the bathroom or go to the kitchen to get something to eat or drink during a commercial break. For ad rates the networks now mostly use the C3 ratings which measure how many people watch the commercials live or on dvr upto 3 days after the program airs. Link to comment
sharky January 7, 2015 Share January 7, 2015 But do you need the Nielsen hardware to have them know you're watching on your DVR? I was under the impression that the +3 and +7 numbers came from the cable companies and measured all DVR users, even those who aren't necessarily a traditional Nielsen family. Link to comment
Camera One February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 "The Bachelor: Chris Tells All" was on last night at the Sunday 8pm timeslot, and got 5.86 million viewers in the first half hour, with a 1.6. That compares with "Heroes and Villains" with 5.6 million viewers and 1.7. "Galavant" only got a 4.53 million and a 1.2 in its season finale. As much as I rag on "Once", it's sad that networks can get higher numbers on a tacky reality show. Link to comment
Delphi February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Doesn't really change how I currently feel about Once, but it makes me seriously side eye humanity and the drivel they'll subject themselves too. 1 Link to comment
FabulousTater February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) As much as I rag on "Once", it's sad that networks can get higher numbers on a tacky reality show. Maybe because what ONCE offers up is no better than a tacky reality show. The tacky reality show knows it's cheap entertainment and at least with a tacky reality show you know what you're getting yourself into. They don't peddle crappy moral relativism as "hope" and "goodness" in the obnoxiously self-righteous style that ONCE habitually crams down the audiences' gullet -- Mass murderers who don't feel bad about what they've done deserve a happy ending too, dontcha know. Edited February 17, 2015 by FabulousTater 3 Link to comment
Souris February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I wonder if we should do a pool for the ratings for 4x12? Link to comment
FurryFury February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I vote 1.8 and down after that, but probably never lower than 1.6. Link to comment
Souris February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I was thinking 1.9 to start, then down. I could see it going 1.4, 1.5. Link to comment
FabulousTater February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Looking at a ratings chart, there was a steady decline in ratings following episode 4x05 that bottomed with the winter finale (the decline was on par with the season 2 ratings nosedive) But despite that, mid-season premieres almost always see generous spikes in ratings. So while I won't be surprised if it opens with a 2.4, my guess is that it opens with a 2.0 because the winter finale was totally lackluster. I feel like plot fatigue has set in with this shows casual audience. My prediction for the rest of the season is that the ratings will stay above the 1.5 range (because the "gimme my crack!" viewership is strong), but my impression is that most everyone else is very much over this show. 2 Link to comment
FurryFury February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I definitely get a feeling that this season finale hasn't gone that well with the audience. Certainly not as well as "Going Home". Do many people care about Queens of Darkness? I kinda doubt it. So 1.8-1.9 seems about right to me. I doubt there will be a big spike. I feel like plot fatigue has set in with this shows casual audience. My prediction for the rest of the season is that the ratings will stay above the 1.5 range (because the "gimme my crack!" viewership is strong), but my impression is that most everyone else is very much over this show. Yeah, pretty much it. Hope s5 will be the last, but they may drag it out if the main cast's contracts are for 6 seasons. 1 Link to comment
HoodlumSheep February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I'll say Once will open with a 2.3 and won't go below a 1.6. They don't really seem to be pushing advertising very much for his half. They should try giving out free buttons at Disney World again or whatever they did for Frozen. I know, I know, there's no "Frozen effect," but I do think a lot of people love their Disney Villains. They should do some "house of villains" type commercials. Guessing the ratings for the 4b opener would make a good "poll of the week." Link to comment
YaddaYadda February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Yeah...why aren't they promoting the show yet? I mean we are now less than two weeks away from 4B starting. Last year, Evil vs Wicked was all over the place. Even the promo they've sort of been running is absolutely nothing that we haven't seen at the end of 4A. Link to comment
FabulousTater February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) Meh, if I were the ABC marketing group I'd be seeing it as throwing good money after bad. They did a marketing blitz for the start of the season and the show opened with a great rating of 3.5 and 10.2 million viewers. But what happened then? The show wasn't able to hold to that. The writing sucks and the first half of the season closed with a 1.7 rating and 5.6 million viewers. The show managed to lose about half of it's viewers. And it wasn't like it was spiking here and there -- the decline was steady. So I don't know that I blame marketing for not spending more money on ONCE. There's only so much marketing can do when the product you're selling sucks and people know it. Edited February 17, 2015 by FabulousTater 2 Link to comment
Delphi February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 Well, the Maleificent movie was one of the biggest movies of 2014, do I expect a fair amount of viewers to turn in for her before tuning out when she's not the main focus. Link to comment
sharky February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I think they probably blew their money on the Frozen stuff. There was a huge billboard at Comic Con and plenty of ads leading up to it. It's probably just a matter of where to spend the cash. That being said, I think part of the ratings issue is there's no surprise with these half seasons. We've had three and how many times has the villain stayed? None. So what's the point of sticking around? You see Anna and Elsa, that's cool, enough of that! I'm not worried about renewal though. ABC isn't doing so well with its programming. Revenge is about to get canceled. Not sure about Resurrection so Once is their only Sunday show. I wish they could match it up with Agent Carter for a Super Girl Sunday or something, but that would require lots of pieces falling into place. 2 Link to comment
YaddaYadda February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I wish they could match it up with Agent Carter for a Super Girl Sunday or something, but that would require lots of pieces falling into place. I love the idea, but no one seems to know whether Agent Carter will be renewed for next season. I think they probably blew their money on the Frozen stuff. There was a huge billboard at Comic Con and plenty of ads leading up to it. It's probably just a matter of where to spend the cash. Who decides how much money should be spent on x and y? Are they really that bad at budgeting the money that's given to them? We had all the frozen promo, Michael Socha on contract and they have used him for I think a total of 15 minutes in the first half. That's also money down the drain if you ask me. Now, we got 3 new villains and a whole bunch of new props to support the new villains plus 3 new recurring characters and one of the actors I'm sure does not come cheap, the Fischler dude Link to comment
Souris February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I feel like Michael Socha's contract could have been used to pay for Emma a damn apartment ! 7 Link to comment
KAOS Agent February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 I expect Once to hit a series low in 4B. There is apathy even with the hardcore fans and I can't imagine the casual viewer is overly excited about the upcoming season. 3 Link to comment
FabulousTater February 17, 2015 Share February 17, 2015 (edited) Who decides how much money should be spent on x and y? Are they really that bad at budgeting the money that's given to them? We had all the frozen promo, Michael Socha on contract and they have used him for I think a total of 15 minutes in the first half. That's also money down the drain if you ask me. I don't actually know for sure, but if ABC works like most other large companies then I think that the marketing of the TV shows is done at the ABC network level (meaning it's handled by the ABC marketing group that handles such things for all it's shows and not just ONCE) and the show runners have nothing to do with the marketing outside of maybe seeing what ABC's marketing has come up with and then giving their seal of approval (though a seal of approval from the show runners is more than likely meaningless and ABC can in actuality do whatever they want because they own the show). The hiring of actors for the shows and the money for show production is something different and it's within the purview of the show runners (as in I think they have to manage the budget they are given which includes spending on actors, FX, costume, etc.). So the contract for Michael Socha doesn't affect the marketing dollars. Again this is me guessing, but I think ABC has one large marketing money pot that's for advertising their broadcast shows -- ONCE, Grey's Anatomy, Scandal, Revenge, Modern Family, etc.. The decision of who gets what advertising pushes, billboards , cross advertising at Disney parks and on other in-house networks (ABC family, Disney Channel) or on other viewing platforms like Hulu, is done at the ABC network executive level and probably contingent on some sort of data or marketing focus groups that tells them what shows could do better if they advertised more, what shows seem to be a lost cause and therefore not as much money is spent advertising for them, etc. Edited February 17, 2015 by FabulousTater 3 Link to comment
Souris February 18, 2015 Share February 18, 2015 I expect Once to hit a series low in 4B. There is apathy even with the hardcore fans and I can't imagine the casual viewer is overly excited about the upcoming season. I agree. I think by the end of 4B, it's going to be pretty bad. Link to comment
Mathius February 18, 2015 Share February 18, 2015 That being said, I think part of the ratings issue is there's no surprise with these half seasons. We've had three and how many times has the villain stayed? None. So what's the point of sticking around? You see Anna and Elsa, that's cool, enough of that! This is still an alien viewpoint to me. Why exactly are people expecting for the villains to stick around? These half seasons are story arcs, and in most series, story arc villains die at the end of the arc. Maybe it's because this show didn't start out in an arc/half season based format and people expect all villains to be like Regina and Rumple and stick around, barely receiving any comeuppance for theirs crimes? Link to comment
sharky February 18, 2015 Share February 18, 2015 Oh, I didn't mean to imply that people expect the villains to stick around and I don't mind the half seasons either. But after the novelty of the Frozen arc died down, the ratings tanked. With the rating the way they are -- and what they're expected to be -- I feel like at some point the creators need to figure out something different to attract viewers. There are people that want to watch, as proven with Frozen, but the ratings can't sustain the novelties and at some point, the show will fail if it's just more of the same. Why can't we have a half season where Rumple is there only villain or a half-season story that focuses on the core characters? That combines the half-season idea with what viewers want -- more of our favorite core characters. 2 Link to comment
FurryFury February 18, 2015 Share February 18, 2015 I wish they could match it up with Agent Carter for a Super Girl Sunday or something, but that would require lots of pieces falling into place. If only we could trade Once for more episodes of Agent Carter! I mean, that show is firing on all cylinders, and I can barely convince myself to watch 2 more episodes of Once because of bad it's got. And even despite it awesomeness Agent Carter still gets worse ratings than Once's series lows. Life is unfair. 2 Link to comment
sharky February 19, 2015 Share February 19, 2015 Adam just posted on his Twitter that there's going to be a recap show on at 7pm on March 1 right before the 4B premiere. Make sure your DVRs are set! Link to comment
KingOfHearts February 19, 2015 Share February 19, 2015 (edited) Adam just posted on his Twitter that there's going to be a recap show on at 7pm on March 1 right before the 4B premiere. Make sure your DVRs are set! "Darkness is Coming"? "Once is Darkened"? Edited February 19, 2015 by KingOfHearts Link to comment
Camera One February 19, 2015 Share February 19, 2015 (edited) It's tentatively called "An Insider's Guide". Let the jokes commence. There'll be no shortage of clips from 4A explaining Operation Mongoose, Cleaving the Dagger and the Sorcerer's Hat. Edited February 19, 2015 by Camera One Link to comment
FabulousTater February 19, 2015 Share February 19, 2015 (edited) "Darkness is Coming"? "Once is Darkened"? "Darkness Is Coming But Not Really" "Once Is Mostly Dark...ish. Let's say, 'Dim'" Edited February 19, 2015 by FabulousTater Link to comment
Serena February 19, 2015 Author Share February 19, 2015 Well, hopefully it includes at least interviews from the actors like the 3B recap. Link to comment
LizaD February 20, 2015 Share February 20, 2015 Maybe ratings, although nowadays, with many different ways of watching TV, it's no longer applicable. Ratings matter for the network's business. Why did the Big Bang Theory big stars command such a huge raise to make them the most highly paid actors? Their single most powerful negotiating tool is the ratings. The Big Bang Theory also has less of a LOUD social presence than Once but which show is more valuable in all ways and then some. To make it more comparable, does anybody think Lana is going to be able to command or negotiate a huge pay raise with the ABC big brass compared to Ellen Pompeo who has less of a loud online fanbase? No way. Why does the NFL practically run the TV and advertising industry? One word and one metric only, ratings. I also think Once fans tend to overestimate Once's online "power" or presence. Here's the top 10 tweeted tv series, of which Once doesn't crack. Meanwhile PLL with a way smaller audience size is #3. Social media is most powerful when it's backed up by ratings, the metric that does matter, like Walking Dead or Game of Thrones or something like Sharknado. https://blog.twitter.com/2014/year-on-twitter-social-tv As for what the ratings says about characters' or actors' popularity? Diddly squat. 2B/3B ratings were lower than 2A/3A. The "Bs" of the seasons were focused on Woegina and a side of Snow while the "As" focused on Emma and Rump. The fall seasons have football to deal with. People like to use excuses like people watch less tv in spring which is untrue. If it was true, ratings for all tv shows would be lower in the spring across the board. I can say Walking Dead is a ratings juggernaut fall or spring. Game of Thrones only air in the spring. If you average the character centrics episode I'm sure no one character is significantly higher or lower than any others. 1 Link to comment
Dani-Ellie February 20, 2015 Share February 20, 2015 As for what the ratings says about characters' or actors' popularity? Diddly squat. My point in bringing up the ratings wasn't so much to be all, "Regina is dragging the show down" but to just point out that the show's ratings took a sharp nosedive in season two that it hasn't really been able to recover from (and hold onto ... the Frozen effect gave it a great bump but the show couldn't retain that new/returning audience). 2x10 was 3.1 in A18-49, 2x11 was 2.8, 2x12 was 2.4, 2x13 was 2.2. Almost an entire ratings point down in 4 episodes, and it didn't hit above 3.0 again until Frozen. That's empirical data that a good chunk of the audience tuned out all at once. I could understand and even anticipate a downward trend as viewers lose interest and whatnot but a drop that drastic indicates a problem. I would think it would behoove them to try to figure out what that problem was. 1 Link to comment
FabulousTater February 20, 2015 Share February 20, 2015 (edited) FWiW, Dani-Ellie, LizaD was responding to a post someone else made in the Writers thread. Not to your post. :-) Ya, unfortunately, ratings can only tell you trends. They have to be correlated with other bits of data and metrics (assuming you have them) to tell you more specific information about what has gone wrong (or right) with a show's trajectory that has caused that trend. I don't think the writers for This Show have ever bothered to look at things like trends and metrics. At best I think they tried to address some of the criticisms from season 2 going into season 3, which was that there wasn't enough focus on the core characters. And I agree with that and good for them for trying to address that problem, but they missed a huge correlating problem associated with that assessment. Their problem wasn't just needing to spend more time on core characters, but also something that was talked about a lot on TWOP and here, and that is (everybody together, now) "Emotional Pay-off". The writers are still falling down drunk failing with that part. I don't have any metrics to prove it, but for my money that's what's still killing their ratings now, or in other words, causing that downwards trend in the ratings. Edited February 20, 2015 by FabulousTater 5 Link to comment
FabulousTater February 20, 2015 Share February 20, 2015 (edited) Oh, I think you're fine and made a fair point in both posts. I just wanted to let you know that you weren't being miss quoted. That was just someone else's quote. :-) Edited February 20, 2015 by FabulousTater 1 Link to comment
KingOfHearts February 26, 2015 Share February 26, 2015 I can imagine the ratings tanking really, really bad. Personally I don't see the Queens of Darkness as that much of a draw to casual audiences. They definitely don't top Frozen. It's a little too much for viewers to take in at one time. I see a lot of people asking, "Wait why is Maleficent here? I thought she died," or "Why is Cruella there? She doesn't have any powers! She doesn't fit in with the rest of the show." There's also the Author and the hat business, which I think is going over many people's heads, even seasoned watchers. Captain Swan fans are getting nothing, Outlaw Queen broke up, Rumpbelle broke up, and Snowing is just a couple of background characters now. I just don't see how any faction of the audience can be excited for this new arc at all. Even Regina fans don't have a lot to look forward to. The only people that could be remotely energized about this are the Swan Queeners, and they're a minority. Then there's the fact that the latter half of seasons on Once just always do horrible. So yeah, I'm not optimistic about the ratings at all. Marketing is trying to advertise it as "darker", but it's too cheesy and family friendly to really appeal to the crowd that would appreciate that. If families tuned in for Frozen, I'm sure they already tuned out long ago. 3 Link to comment
Curio February 26, 2015 Share February 26, 2015 There's also the fact that there's been very little promotion leading up to this spring premiere. Last year, I remember a lot more hoopla over the Wicked Witch storyline and the cast did their rounds on several different talk shows leading up to the premiere. Didn't JMo, Josh, Colin, and Lana go do Good Morning America or something around this time, too? It's weird that there hasn't been any big push except for some ambiguous commercial spots and online articles. I'd expect Sunday's episode to come back somewhere around 7.0 million viewers with a 1.9 rating, but wouldn't be surprised if it got 6.8 or 6.9 million either. And then it'll probably drop down into the low-6/high-5 million range for the rest of the season. Link to comment
Souris February 26, 2015 Share February 26, 2015 My suspicion is that A&E know they're getting a Season 5 and that will be it, because most of the actors don't intend to re-up their contracts -- so they don't care what the ratings are. Clearly ABC isn't putting much effort into promoting Once, so they're probably just riding it out and concentrating on shows that aren't so obviously on their last legs and trying to stick their fingers into even leakier holes in the dike. They're probably also spending the bulk of their budget trying to clone Shonda Rhimes. Link to comment
sharky February 26, 2015 Share February 26, 2015 Lana Padilla is supposed to be on Kelly and Michael this week and I think Ginny is going to be somewhere as well. That's actually a good thing since the four of them on one short segment on GMA barely covered anything. And I'm assuming Colin is currently in LA to do some media there as well. We also have to remember that they probably get budgeted a set amount for the season. Last year, they blew it on the Wicked Witch. This year, they front loaded it with the Frozen stuff. Hell, there was a huge Frozen banner on the side of a baseball stadium at Comic Con if that gives you an idea of what they did. It paid off -- the beginning of season 4 was amazing ratings wise. So I'm not too worried yet. Let's see what Sunday's numbers are before we get too doomsday. Remember there are many more fans who haven't dissected all of this the way we have. 1 Link to comment
Camera One February 26, 2015 Share February 26, 2015 Hopefully, what ABC is doing is at least getting the word out that the show returns this Sunday. Whether or not people will decide to come back is another matter, but first, they at least need to know/be reminded that March 1st is the day of return. Link to comment
LizaD February 26, 2015 Share February 26, 2015 Marketing is trying to advertise it as "darker", but it's too cheesy and family friendly to really appeal to the crowd that would appreciate that. If families tuned in for Frozen, I'm sure they already tuned out long ago. I think the show is dark in a cheesy non-family friendly way. It's a soap opera so the subject matter is pretty mature and veer towards dark material but just like on soaps, it's covered in a cheesy melodramatic goo that is totally ridiculous. Probably the reason why they couldn't hang onto those new Frozen viewers, most of whom were probably families with little girls that were diehard Frozen fans. I don't think the writers understood at all what blew Frozen up into a billion dollar franchise. It's such a shame because all of the 3 main actors were on point with the Disney cartoon. suspicion is that A&E know they're getting a Season 5 and that will be it, because most of the actors don't intend to re-up their contracts Are we sure the original contracts were for 5 years? Isn't the average 6? If so, of the main cast I think only Carlyle and Jen are most likely leaving. It's clear that Carlyle has checked out and his opinions for Rump and the general show seem to be the polar opposite from the writers. He also said at the very beginning that signing a long term contract was huge for him cause he didn't like being locked down for so long. I recall a Jen interview back in S2 or 3 where she said it was exhausting and desperately needed a break. She wished that the show was only 12 episodes per season. That's practically a flashing neon sign to me. And she also seems to be more into directing now. I don't know either way with the others. They haven't been as vocal and obvious with their opinions as those 2 that I know of. I do think the show might possibly survive without Carlyle and Jen. They would probably get Wonderland ratings and that's on par with the other Sunday offerings. Unless they have something better in the pipeline, like more Shonda shows to plug up Sundays, it might be enough. Link to comment
Amerilla February 26, 2015 Share February 26, 2015 Are we sure the original contracts were for 5 years? Isn't the average 6? I think the average used to be 7 years, but from what I'm seeing online, 3-5 has become more common. We know from his interviews that Carlyle is signed for 5 years, so that was probably the basic commitment the network wanted from the top-billed actors. I would add Ginny to the list of people who probably wouldn't renew. She obviously loves being a mom and wants to have more kids, and that's a lot easier if you aren't working 15-20 hours a day, eight months a year. I don't see Josh staying if Ginny goes. Not much point in Emilie and Colin staying if Bobby and Jen go. I have the sense of Lana being the one most likely to want to hang on, but who knows? Maybe she's getting as sick of Regina as we are. Link to comment
sharky February 26, 2015 Share February 26, 2015 The show revolves around Emma so I wouldn't be surprised if they had Jen sign a longer contract or would be willing to give her more money to stay while potentially letting Robert walk away. Link to comment
Serena February 26, 2015 Author Share February 26, 2015 Can you imagine the hilarity if only Lana and Jared renewed? They'd have to sign Sean too, and it could become the OQ + Henry show! 2 Link to comment
Amerilla February 26, 2015 Share February 26, 2015 Can you imagine the hilarity if only Lana and Jared renewed? They'd have to sign Sean too, and it could become the OQ + Henry show! Maybe that's been Adam & Eddy's master plan all along! Link to comment
LizaD February 26, 2015 Share February 26, 2015 Well nobody's gettting a big pay raise if they renew. The ratings are slipping each season and serial dramas don't do well in syndication so there would be no huge motivation to get more seasons for that reason. The only reason to keep this show is because ABC has nothing better ratings wise. I would add Ginny to the list of people who probably wouldn't renew. I thought about that. I don't think she gives any crap about the show anymore or is a lot more zen about it. I recall her saying back in S2 that she was really upset when fans came up to her and screamed at her for being mean to Woegina and that she accepted the blame for not knowing how to integrate Snow and Mary Margaret but that was the last time I heard her speak about caring about it. That said I don't think there's a cushier job for her and Josh than working on the same show. I think it's a challenge for married actors to even get gigs in the same city. 1 Link to comment
Souris February 28, 2015 Share February 28, 2015 FWIW, I was reading an interview with Viola Davis in Entertainment Weekly, and it mentioned that she had signed a "standard 7-year contract" with ABC for HTGAWM. So I would imagine that the Once actors do have 7-year contracts after all. Except for maybe Robert Carlyle, because, well, he's Robert Carlyle. But I still don't see the show going that long if the show keeps hemorrhaging viewers, which seems a given for 4B IMO. The article also mentioned that ABC wanted Viola to tweet more. I'm not surprised that's something they encourage their actors to do. 2 Link to comment
Serena February 28, 2015 Author Share February 28, 2015 (edited) Yeah, I can see them maybe giving Robert or Ginnifer a shorter contract, but the other actors? I see people claiming all the time they signed 5 or 6 year contracts, but I've never seen a legit source for it? 7 year is the industry standard. Once may be losing viewers, but it's the only thing on Sunday night on ABC that is not a complete failure. For next year, at least Resurrection will be cancelled, so that means they have to find at least one replacement. Revenge may be getting a last pity renewal to wrap things up, but no more than that. If they were to cancel Once too, they'd have to find THREE new shows to put on Sunday... I doubt they'd do that. Edited February 28, 2015 by Serena 1 Link to comment
RadioGirl27 February 28, 2015 Share February 28, 2015 If an actress like Viola Davis, with two Oscar nominations, signed a 7-years contract, I seriously doubt that any of the Once actors, not even Carlyle, have a shorter one. Anyway, I'm quite sure season 5 would be the last. Link to comment
Recommended Posts