Ratings and Scheduling: Hail to the Gods

[kismet]

I never put together that CBS is the one the airs Thurs night football. I only ever watch it when my team is on. I wonder if that impacts the shows the CW airs on Thurs. It seems like they have tried to avoid putting CBS owned shows in direct competition with NFL Thurs, from my basic memory recall. Most of the CBS owned shows were put on Thurs after NFL is over. It sorta makes sense now that Supernatural & Arrow got put there. CBS would not want to lose $$ on their owned CW shows because their sister network is airing the NFL. But putting the WB owned shows make sense from a financial standpoint, at least in CBS's mind. It also makes sense to put more fan-heavy shows there because if they lose the ratings war, they likely are not hurt as badly as newer shows or ones with smaller followings.

[quarks]

1 hour ago, kismet said:

I never put together that CBS is the one the airs Thurs night football. I only ever watch it when my team is on. I wonder if that impacts the shows the CW airs on Thurs. It seems like they have tried to avoid putting CBS owned shows in direct competition with NFL Thurs, from my basic memory recall. Most of the CBS owned shows were put on Thurs after NFL is over. It sorta makes sense now that Supernatural & Arrow got put there. CBS would not want to lose $$ on their owned CW shows because their sister network is airing the NFL. But putting the WB owned shows make sense from a financial standpoint, at least in CBS's mind. It also makes sense to put more fan-heavy shows there because if they lose the ratings war, they likely are not hurt as badly as newer shows or ones with smaller followings.

Thursday Night Football is only on CBS for a couple more weeks before moving back to NBC.

That said, yes, I think it probably did impact scheduling considerations, not because of any WB/CBS things, but because the CW has been struggling in that 9 PM Thursday timeslot for several seasons now with everything not named Supernatural - and that's an important timeslot, since it's the traditional last night for film studios to push their Friday night opening films.

[Soulfire]

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/the-sked-thursday-network-scorecard-10-19-2017.html

Edited October 20, 2017 by Soulfire

[Morrigan2575]

Happy Arrow held, sad SPN dropped a tenth in the demo and quite a bit in viewers.

[Soulfire]

Final ratings for 602 --

[Starfish35]

So until we get the unrounded numbers, it's:

1. The Flash 0.9 and 2.536 million viewers
2. Supernatural 0.7 and 1.898 million viewers
3. Riverdale 0.6 and 1.764 million viewers
4. Supergirl 0.5 and 1.755 million viewers
5. Legends 0.5 and 1.581 million viewers
6. Arrow 0.5 and 1.505 million viewers
7. Dynasty 0.3 and 0.918 million viewers
8. Valor 0.2 and 0.989 million viewers

[Morrigan2575]

Woot! Go SPN! Shame about Arrow.

[catrox14]

Look out Barry Allen. The Winchesters et al are coming for you!

[Starfish35]

It is interesting.  Supernatural is in its 13th season and it's the second highest (at least this week) on the network.  CBS's highest rated drama (NCIS) is in its 15th season, and its highest rated comedy (Big Bang Theory) is in its 11th season.  ABC's highest rated drama (Grey's Anatomy) is in its 14th season and its highest rated comedy (Modern Family) is in its ninth season.  

NBC has a couple of new hits, but L&O:SVU is in its 19th season and still rating 3rd for scripted shows.  And FOX has The Simpsons in their 29th season, still coming in 2nd.  

[Primal Slayer]

I definitely thnk this will push TheCW to attempt to do more non-superhero things (well they are already adapting another DC title so I guess not lol) but I think for the most part, any new Arrowverse shows are legitimately off the table for the time being.

And I think the thing with all of those shows, they have a built in  audience and are rather steady in their storytelling. You know what to expect and they don't try to really shake things up that will change the show. Something that I feel like really hurt Arrow, just as it hurt Real Housewives of New York back in the day lol.

[LeighAn]

I'd be concerned more if the CW lived on live ratings alone but they don't. The deal they have with Netflix is worth a billion dollars over time. So I really don't think Arrows ratings which are consistent and have very little significant drops outside of natural course of viewer drops over time are a concern to them. ?‍♀️

[Primal Slayer]

I am not worried about the show since it's still performing relatively well by CW standards and the crossover should give it the boost it needs to climb up the ratings latter but I do think this is the beginning of the end for the Arrowverse expanding.

[LeighAn]

I mean they keep renewing Jane the Virgin and My Crazy Ex when those shows are getting 0.2-0.4 demos. If they haven't loss faith in those shows I doubt they've loss faith in Berlantiverse/Arrowverse which gives them fairly respectable ratings in comparison to the big four networks. Also didn't they just commission another one of Berlantis pilots? 

[Primal Slayer]

Berltani production and Arrowverse are different though. Riverdale is a Berlanti production and JtV/CEx-Gf don't have multiple spin offs. I just think if they continue like this they won't try to expand the Arrowverse any further on the network.

[Starfish35]

Well, JtV and CEG probably have more to do with keeping some CBS productions on the network.  All the higher rated shows are WB productions.

Edited October 21, 2017 by Starfish35

[catrox14]

1 hour ago, Primal Slayer said:

I definitely thnk this will push TheCW to attempt to do more non-superhero things (well they are already adapting another DC title so I guess not lol) but I think for the most part, any new Arrowverse shows are legitimately off the table for the time being.

And I think the thing with all of those shows, they have a built in  audience and are rather steady in their storytelling. You know what to expect and they don't try to really shake things up that will change the show. Something that I feel like really hurt Arrow, just as it hurt Real Housewives of New York back in the day lol.

Agree. Breaking up Olicity, dragging Laurel/BS back from the dead and not letting her stay dead hurt Arrow. IMO

[Primal Slayer]

I think the entire breaking up Olicity, killing off Laurel then bringing in newbies and practically dropping Thea hurt the show/ratings. I think if they'd keep the S4 team they wouldn't have seen as much drop in viewers. All of it was to much at once. 

[JamieLynn832002]

1 hour ago, LeighAn said:

I mean they keep renewing Jane the Virgin and My Crazy Ex when those shows are getting 0.2-0.4 demos. If they haven't loss faith in those shows I doubt they've loss faith in Berlantiverse/Arrowverse which gives them fairly respectable ratings in comparison to the big four networks. Also didn't they just commission another one of Berlantis pilots? 

I think Gina Rodriguez and Rachel Bloom winning Golden Globes has a lot to do with JtV and Crazy Ex being renewed despite fairly abysmal ratings.

[kismet]

1 hour ago, LeighAn said:

I mean they keep renewing Jane the Virgin and My Crazy Ex when those shows are getting 0.2-0.4 demos. If they haven't loss faith in those shows I doubt they've loss faith in Berlantiverse/Arrowverse which gives them fairly respectable ratings in comparison to the big four networks. Also didn't they just commission another one of Berlantis pilots? 

Those shows bring them critical attention and award nominations. Plus they fill certain diversity quotas being that they are female driven shows, something only 1 of the Flarrowvers & Berlanti shows on CW can claim.

53 minutes ago, Starfish35 said:

Well, JtV and CEG probably have more to do with keeping some CBS productions on the network.  All the higher rated shows are WB productions.

That could factor into it.

11 minutes ago, JamieLynn832002 said:

I think Gina Rodriguez and Rachel Bloom winning Golden Globes has a lot to do with JtV and Crazy Ex being renewed despite fairly abysmal ratings.

Totally agree. The GG wins have helped. I think Rachel Bloom even got an Emmy nod, perhaps a win? I can't remember. Those shows make the CW artsy & appealing to certain demographics and advertisers, despite their ratings.

[quarks]

2 hours ago, Primal Slayer said:

I definitely thnk this will push TheCW to attempt to do more non-superhero things (well they are already adapting another DC title so I guess not lol) but I think for the most part, any new Arrowverse shows are legitimately off the table for the time being.

 

Maybe.  I wonder.

Because on the one hand, you're right - the live numbers for the CW DC shows are not good, and common sense and my own first instinct would be to say, ok, yeah, time to back away from the superhero thing. Plus, most of the major critical recognition for CW shows has been for the non-superhero shows Jane the Virgin and Crazy Ex-Girlfriend.  And I think we can make a decent argument that, as of right now, there's an oversupply of superhero shows - a solid argument against having more, even if the live numbers argued for more Arrowverse shows, which really, they don't. 

But on the other hand - everything else they've tried in the past couple of years hasn't done well in the live numbers either. They went all out for Riverdale this summer - and came up short. Yeah, it was their second best show last week and third best this week, and it's their hands down Twitter lead - but it's underperforming both what Supergirl was pulling in at the start of last season and of this week, Arrow in that same time slot last year  - after Arrow's big post-Olicity breakup/5th season drop.* Valor, their main attempt to really do something different this season, has been a complete flop. Dynasty, which at least kinda sounded like a CW related thing, also looks like it's heading to immediate cancellation.  And if you look at the top shows, all of them are comic book shows except Supernatural.  

Adding to this, the last new, non comic book property "hit" they had (using the word "hit" in the loosest possible terms) was the genre show The 100, which only made it to cult status and never achieved the live viewing numbers of Flash or Arrow.  And perhaps most importantly, as Pedowitz keeps saying, and CBS financials confirm, the CW makes most of its revenue from post views and ancillary merchandise - where the DC shows apparently do well.  (Imagine how well they would do with a better storefront for the DC online store. I know!) I think there's a reason why three of their upcoming shows (Black Lightning, Sabrina, and Project 13) are based on comic book properties. 

If Riverdale had done better in the live numbers, or if Dynasty or Valor had turned out to be decent rather than mediocre shows, I'd agree with you. I still mostly agree with you. But I'm just wondering. 

 

 

*Which, by the way, is just strange considering their Twitter metrics - Riverdale is outperforming not just every CW show, but most major network shows, and even coming close to hitting some Game of Thrones levels on Twitter. It's at least more fuel for thinking that Fox and ABC are correct, and Nielsen's metrics are way off. 

[LeighAn]

1 hour ago, Primal Slayer said:

I think the entire breaking up Olicity, killing off Laurel then bringing in newbies and practically dropping Thea hurt the show/ratings. I think if they'd keep the S4 team they wouldn't have seen as much drop in viewers. All of it was to much at once. 

And yet TV Grim Reaper only the other day rubbished claims that content is responsible for rating declines over time. And since ratings are what he does for a living I'm inclined to take his word ?‍♀️

Also IF the CW are worried about Arrowverse shows I doubt it would be Arrow and not The Flash Supergirl and Legends of tomorrow that have had either significant drops or performed under expectations since they started airing given their expensive special effect budgets.

 

I mean if we were to use content logic argument  then wouldn't the fact that Supergirl that's been and Legends that's been on the CW two and bit years can barely get better ratings then a show in its sixth season and is getting beaten by a show in its 13th season say more about the lack of quality of those shows then Arrow? Or what about the fact that the last episode of The Flash got less then 4x02 of Arrow? Doesn't that speak to The Flash lack in quality? 

 

I mean if we are going to use the quality = ratings argument then I say The Flash Legends and Supergirl writers should rethink what they can do  to be better in quality hey? 

Edited October 21, 2017 by LeighAn

[kismet]

Supernatural was a WB show, so really the CW doesn't deserve a whole lot of credit in creating Supernatural. I would have to say that belongs to the fans, the creative powers and the cast/crew of the show. Kudos to Mark Pedowitz for recognizing a special show and fanbase. I mean those SPN fans are truly some of the most dedicated I have seen.

I honestly do wonder what the CW will do with its programming, it has been struggling for many years and I say that as someone who up until this year has been a loyal fan to the network since it's origination. My dropping of the Flarrowverse (with exception of LoT) has really reduced my traffic to and viewing of the network. Without tuning into the Flarrowverse, there are little to no blocks of available CW shows, add to that I don't see any of the promos for other CW shows in the midst of my viewing. I can remember a time when I watched or was interested in a show every night on the CW. Sometimes it's nice to be the niche network or have a built in audience. But sometimes that can blow up in your face if all of your eggs are in one basket. On wrong egg can spoil them all.

I don't know why the CW struggles to find good programming or foster it when they have it. I do think it struggles with identity and reputation issues. And that then cuts into advertisers, which then cuts into show budgets. It is vicious circle.

[Primal Slayer]

2 minutes ago, kismet said:

I don't know why the CW struggles to find good programming or foster it when they have it. I do think it struggles with identity and reputation issues. And that then cuts into advertisers, which then cuts into show budgets. It is vicious circle.

They seem to put majority of their stock in Berlanti. They haven't been able to find the next Joss Whedon or Ryan Murphy. Some of it probably has to do with the fact that they have to keep everything in house, from WB or CBS unlike TheWB who was able to get shows and creators from other networks.

[Velocity23]

Arrow live +3 ratings

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/dvr-ratings/week-3-broadcast-live-3-ratings-oct-9-15-2017/

[bijoux]

So they're in second spot regarding the increase percentage wise in both the demo and total viewers.

[tv echo]

Monday Night Football and Thursday Night Football live-watching?

I'd be curious to see what Flash's ratings would be if moved to a different night.

Edited October 21, 2017 by tv echo

[Morrigan2575]

56 minutes ago, bijoux said:

So they're in second spot regarding the increase percentage wise in both the demo and total viewers.

Huh? They're in 4th. Or do you mean just out of Berlanti shows?

[bijoux]

I was talking percentages, not numbers. 67% increase in the demo, same as JtV, while Supertirl got an 80% increase, which seems huge to me, and a 59% increase in the number of viewers, compared to JtV's 79%. Am I reading the table wrong?

[quarks]

On 10/20/2017 at 11:22 PM, kismet said:

I don't know why the CW struggles to find good programming or foster it when they have it. I do think it struggles with identity and reputation issues. And that then cuts into advertisers, which then cuts into show budgets. It is vicious circle.

Well, they have had good programming - and given that they only provide 10 hours of scripted prime time programming per week, their ratio of good shows to crap shows has been at the very least equal to the other networks, and in some cases superior. 

I mean, it was not all that long ago that Arrow was ending up on various year end top ten lists, and Flash landed on a few of those as well. Meanwhile, Crazy Ex-Girlfriend has been nominated for and won multiple Emmy, Golden Globe and other awards, and Jane the Virgin was nominated for Golden Globes and Emmys as well, and picked up a Golden Globe. The 100, in its second season, earned major critical praise (and then, the third season hit, but let's move on). 

In terms of finding good programming - well, that's a struggle for every network, especially given the current competition with Netflix, Amazon and Hulu. I think there's also the issue that HBO, Showtime (mostly), Netflix, Amazon and Hulu are able to run shorter series, which can be attractive to talent for various reasons - yes, there's issues when/if a show with only ten to thirteen episodes ties you to it exclusively for a year, meaning that you have fewer episodes/work/income for the year, but on the other hand, you also don't have the same punishing schedule of a 23 episode series. What the CW seems to be doing, with the exception of the Berlanti shows, is picking up shows originally developed or intended for other networks - for instance, Crazy Ex-Girlfriend was originally intended for Showtime - saving them some of the initial costs of development.  Valor was presumably initially pitched to CBS, but then seems to have struggled to find name actors and ended up at the CW.  Josh Schwartz has primarily done CW shows in recent years, but it's very possible, if not probable, that he initially shopped Dynasty to Fox and possibly NBC, where he also has a history.

Regarding advertising/show budgets: Berlanti has specifically said in multiple interviews now that his budgets are no longer tied to the advertising income aka the demo, (which we can see - the last episode of Arrow showed that Arrow has a slightly increased production budget this year, despite the demo/live number drops, and everyone involved with Arrow seems to be speaking with some confidence about a seventh season, despite the demo/live number drops.) CBS has flat out stated that the CW is getting most of its revenue from post-views.  I doubt that anyone at the CW is happy with this week's live numbers, since they are still indicators of potential post-view revenue, and one of their parent companies is currently involved with a takeover bid, and yes, the CW is still only buying/paying for very cheap shows, to the point of creating a specific SAG contract to allow them to pay their actors somewhat less, but that's not tied to the advertising income.

[Starfish35]

Spotted Ratings is starting to track the unrounded ratings, so as near as I can tell from reading the comments and looking at the show pages, these were the CW unrounded final ratings for last week.

1. The Flash 0.919
2. Supernatural 0.662
3. Riverdale 0.635
4. Arrow 0.539
5. Legends 0.488
6. Supergirl 0.486
7. Dynasty 0.274
8. Jane the Virgin 0.229
9. Valor 0.227
10. Crazy Ex-Girlfriend 0.203

[lemotomato]

Thanks for tracking down the unrounded ratings, @Starfish35. I'm really annoyed that it looks like tvseriesfinale is only posting the numbers rounded to the tenths instead of the hundredths like they used to.

[Lord Kira]

Supernatural is a monster. The CW is going to keep throwing money at Jared and Jensen to keep them signed on indefinitely. What a beast.

[Morrigan2575]

3 hours ago, Lord Kira said:

Supernatural is a monster. The CW is going to keep throwing money at Jared and Jensen to keep them signed on indefinitely. What a beast.

Hahaha, 50 year old hunters and they'll still look hot. 

 

5 hours ago, Starfish35 said:

Spotted Ratings is starting to track the unrounded ratings, so as near as I can tell from reading the comments and looking at the show pages, these were the CW unrounded final ratings for last week.

1. The Flash 0.919
2. Supernatural 0.662
3. Riverdale 0.635
4. Arrow 0.539
5. Legends 0.488
6. Supergirl 0.486
7. Dynasty 0.274
8. Jane the Virgin 0.229
9. Valor 0.227
10. Crazy Ex-Girlfriend 0.203

It's fascinating to me that Arrow continuously beats (OK only 2 EPs in) LoT and Supergirl in the unrounded demo but, still has fewer viewers. I'm also shocked that LoT is actually higher than Supergirl. 

[kismet]

LoT I think is a superior show to the CW version of Supergirl. Also I think it is in a better slot than Supergirl. Monday is a hard night with a lot of competition.

[quarks]

23 hours ago, tv echo said:

Maybe the reason that The WB and The CW are pushing Riverdale so hard is because of the failure of Valor and Dynasty to attract many viewers or much buzz. Those were the two new shows that, according to Mark Pedowitz, were aimed at getting back the female demo that they've lost.

I don't think so.  I'm pretty sure they pushed Riverdale hard because the social media numbers were outstanding last year - and are still amazing this year - suggesting that Riverdale had a solid chance of becoming their next huge hit, and that the Nielsen figures are way, way off for Riverdale.  I wasn't kidding: some of their live tweeting numbers are equal to or beating Game of Thrones, and even episodes that don't hit that level are still at numbers associated with shows with at least six million viewers. It's not just Twitter, either.  And yet, Nielsen is still, inexplicably, claiming that Riverdale has fewer than 2 million live viewers. I'm not the only person noting this discrepancy.

I think Valor failed to attract many viewers because a) it's on the wrong network, and b) was promoted terribly. The first decent promo that I saw for the show came after the first episode aired - too late.  With Dynasty, I think there's a dual problem: one, many viewers of the original show are now, how to put this kindly, mostly watching CBS - and as we just saw with Supergirl, CBS viewers don't necessarily pop over to the CW, and two, from the promos, the show doesn't look as entertaining as the original well over the top show. Nobody has pushed anyone else into a pond yet. What are you thinking, new Dynasty?

[statsgirl]

1 hour ago, quarks said:

the show doesn't look as entertaining as the original well over the top show. Nobody has pushed anyone else into a pond yet. What are you thinking, new Dynasty?

Another problem is that when the original Dynasty was on, the idea of two rich women fighting it out in a pond was shocking.  Now we see it multiple times a day on reality television.

[Soulfire]

Edited October 27, 2017 by Soulfire

[Starfish35]

Is that a series low in viewers?

[way2interested]

Technically yes and no. 517, 519, and 520, the series lows, had around the same amount of viewers (although 519 and 520 were preempted).

Edited October 27, 2017 by way2interested

[SmallScreenDiva]

I'm not surprised. After the first two episodes, people I know who are offline (aka not spoiled) who were checking out the new season said they were done and quitting the show. Just like with last season's first two episodes, they don't like what they see as the focus on newbies.

Edited October 27, 2017 by SmallScreenDiva

[Angel12d]

I can't say I'm surprised. One of the biggest complaints I kept reading after last episode was Oliver giving up being GA again. I can see why that might have turned some viewers away.

Edited October 27, 2017 by Angel12d

[NumberCruncher]

While this episode was the best one of the season so far, it's been a rather boring start as a whole so I'm not at all surprised viewership is down.  I do think too much focus on the new characters started the decline last year and is continuing to hurt this season's numbers.  I also concur that the recycling storyline of Oliver quitting again (and the general repetitiveness of storylines altogether) are contributing.  On a personal note, I don't enjoy the insertion of kid actors on adult shows so I wouldn't be surprised if the William storyline is turning others off as well--even if it's something the show hasn't explored before.

I really wish they would have stuck with their original 5-year plan because I just don't think these writers are talented enough to keep things fresh and interesting six seasons into the show.

Edited October 27, 2017 by NumberCruncher
Grammar

[strikera0]

1 hour ago, NumberCruncher said:

I really wish they would have stuck with their original 5-year plan because I just don't think these writers are talented enough to keep things fresh and interesting six seasons into the show.

Arrow has been recycling the same plots since I can remember. The writers got away with it early on because there weren't many superhero shows to choose from and the series was too new for people to pick up on the repetitiveness of the storytelling, but it's really catching up with them big time now. I also think the writers have proven to be completely oblivious to their own failures. Just look at the "shocking" cliffhanger endings of the first 2 episodes: Not only did those things (Oliver getting exposed and stepping down as the GA) happen several times before, but they also always fizzled out with no consequences in later episodes. These cheap twists simply aren't cutting it anymore because the viewership has learnt by now that this show is too gutless to make them stick. If anything, it may elicit some groans and yawns before viewers ultimately decide to delete Arrow from their DVRs and move on to better written tv shows of which there are plenty to choose from. 

Edited October 27, 2017 by strikera0

[Starfish35]

Unrounded preliminary numbers from Spotted Ratings comments:

Supernatural ....... 0.609 (0.625 ... 0.593)
Arrow .................. 0.485 (0.503 ... 0.468)

[strikera0]

It will be a race between Arrow and LOT for the first 0,4 amongst the Flarrowverse shows. 

[Starfish35]

And Supergirl.  

Actually, with Halloween on Tuesday, I think it's possible that both Legends and Supergirl could hit 0.4 this next week.

Edited October 27, 2017 by Starfish35

[kismet]

I think its a combination of the newbies, the recycled plots and the predictable/banal twists have really took a big chuck out of the Arrow audience. I know Arrow has been recycling plots for years now, but I think it's starting to show because there's only so many times you can recycle something before it starts showing the wear & tear. Dan Fogelman the (creator/exec producer of This Is Us) had an interested tweet over the week...

I don't think the audience cares about the characters that the writers want us to care about. Focusing so much on the newbies was a bad choice. And it started with s4, when they started to push OQ out of the center of his show. I really want to get back to characters that I care about. They have started to do that with the reunion, but honestly I also know Arrow's pattern now. It's only a matter of time before they recycle out the stuff that made me rage for 2 seasons. Now if they can find a way to break bad habits, perhaps some of the audience will return. But most who left probably know better. Repeat, Rinse, Recycle that is the Arrow way.

[LeighAn]

20 minutes ago, kismet said:

I think its a combination of the newbies, the recycled plots and the predictable/banal twists have really took a big chuck out of the Arrow audience. I know Arrow has been recycling plots for years now, but I think it's starting to show because there's only so many times you can recycle something before it starts showing the wear & tear. Dan Fogelman the (creator/exec producer of This Is Us) had an interested tweet over the week...

I don't think the audience cares about the characters that the writers want us to care about. Focusing so much on the newbies was a bad choice. And it started with s4, when they started to push OQ out of the center of his show. I really want to get back to characters that I care about. They have started to do that with the reunion, but honestly I also know Arrow's pattern now. It's only a matter of time before they recycle out the stuff that made me rage for 2 seasons. Now if they can find a way to break bad habits, perhaps some of the audience will return. But most who left probably know better. Repeat, Rinse, Recycle that is the Arrow way.

This is us is a great show. But I garuntee you once it hits 6 seasons it will see drops in viewers probably big and people with complaints about the writing, characterisation, repetitive storylines etc. 

[kismet]

2 minutes ago, LeighAn said:

This is us is a great show. But I garuntee you once it hits 6 seasons it will see drops in viewers probably big and people with complaints about the writing, characterisation, repetitive storylines etc. 

Probably... most shows do. I just think it seems to have a better showrunner who seems to know that characters are the heart of any good show. MG gave up on his characters a long time ago. WM lit characterization w/ accelerant and watched it burn. Characters have been sacrificed for plots and twist (some literally); and that type of damage doesn't heal no matter how talented the actors are.

I just thought it was a quality tweet and philosophy about plots & twists. This is Us is not a perfect show and even it's season 2 has been a little rocky for me plotwise, but despite it I still care about the characters and I know the showrunners do. I can't say the same about Arrow showrunners. I stopped watching the show because I did care about Arrow's characters and nothing led me to believe Arrow did.

[Morrigan2575]

I wonder if Thor will hurt ratings next week?