Ratings and Scheduling: Hail to the Gods

[way2interested]

Meh, I think it's just a mix of new day, new time, other newer shows, show fatigue, superhero fatigue, crossover fatigue, overall network/cable tv fatigue, audience who left after 415, and then maybe whatever plot choices they make.

Just now, Morrigan2575 said:

I wonder if Thor will hurt ratings next week?

Was wondering that. Like how Punisher is coming out against Justice League.

[SmallScreenDiva]

I'm really curious about the feedback the network is getting. They pushed BC all summer, the first three episodes of the season have had heavy BC presence (also curious about screen times) and viewership seems to be dropping. Is there something there? Just falling numbers due to WS or other shows? New timeslot? 

[kes0704]

6 hours ago, SmallScreenDiva said:

I'm really curious about the feedback the network is getting. They pushed BC all summer, the first three episodes of the season have had heavy BC presence (also curious about screen times) and viewership seems to be dropping. Is there something there? Just falling numbers due to WS or other shows? New timeslot? 

I was wondering the same thing after I saw this tweet. Maybe the audience isn’t warming up to the new BC as much as they hoped? 

[Midnight Lullaby]

That tweet is so....LOL. Self-criticism is a useful concept actors should probably learn about.

[JamieLynn832002]

If that tweet is about Arrow/BC, I really don't see it helping the situation since my first thought was "Maybe it's the fact your character has been on team for 9 months and seems to think she's in charge of people who've been there for 6 years, Juliana" and not "Sexism!"

[Guest]

On one hand I can see where JH is coming from, just in a general way of how female characters are viewed compared to male characters. But then I also cringed when I read her tweet because I think actors should just quietly accept the criticism about the part they're playing. It's part of the job. And I also don't think JH is playing Dinah right this season tbh. She needs to dial it back a bit. She wasn't like this in s5 so there's been a big change and not in a good way, IMO.

Also, I hate the term "strong female character" but that's a whole other story. Haha.

[strikera0]

In season 2, people were blaming Laurel, Sara and Oliver/Sara for the dips in ratings. In seasons 3 and 4, Laurel was the go-to target when it came to ratings declines. Now, it's Dinah. Doesn't the blame game get old after a while?

[Velocity23]

8 minutes ago, strikera0 said:

In season 2, people were blaming Laurel, Sara and Oliver/Sara for the dips in ratings. In seasons 3 and 4, Laurel was the go-to target when it came to ratings declines. Now, it's Dinah. Doesn't the blame game get old after a while?

I thought people blame Olicity for the drop on ratings in s4 on  too much Olicity and the fact  that LL died. Implying that if LL havent been killed Arrow would have higher ratings, even though the ratings dropped before her death. Also the Felicity and Friends complaints. 

Edited October 28, 2017 by Velocity23

[Lily-n11]

12 minutes ago, strikera0 said:

In season 2, people were blaming Laurel, Sara and Oliver/Sara for the dips in ratings. In seasons 3 and 4, Laurel was the go-to target when it came to ratings declines. Now, it's Dinah. Doesn't the blame game get old after a while?

I think your list shows a pattern. Everytime the show tried to bring new relationships into the bunker it resulted in the sidelining of OTA interactions. Maybe that is what turned / is turning people away. Not the new characters alone but how they affected the existing relationships.

Edited October 28, 2017 by Lily-n11

[apinknightmare]

31 minutes ago, strikera0 said:

In season 2, people were blaming Laurel, Sara and Oliver/Sara for the dips in ratings. In seasons 3 and 4, Laurel was the go-to target when it came to ratings declines. Now, it's Dinah. Doesn't the blame game get old after a while?

Nah, S4's preferred scapegoat is Felicity and Olicity. People generally blame what they don't like on the drop in ratings. Over on reddit, this season's drop is attributed to Olicity, because Black Siren was hyped up and isn't anywhere around, because people don't like Diggle, and because Felicity's spending time with William. Tiring, sure...but it won't ever stop.

[Midnight Lullaby]

Drop in ratings in season 3?

Edited October 28, 2017 by Midnight Lullaby

[LeighAn]

Seriously Juliana. If you get pissy over some minor criticism you're in the wrong profession love.

Edited October 28, 2017 by LeighAn

[Primal Slayer]

I don't see her saying anything that big of a deal, it hasn't reached SA levels or MG levels. And what she stated was truth to it.

[tv echo]

If it doesn't happen before then, ratings for Arrow's Thanksgiving Day episode will likely hit a new low.

Regarding JH's tweet... Rene/Wild Dog has also been badly received. RG thinks his character's tough, but he's coming across as obnoxious (though less so this season).

Edited October 28, 2017 by tv echo

[tv echo]

2 hours ago, apinknightmare said:

Nah, S4's preferred scapegoat is Felicity and Olicity. People generally blame what they don't like on the drop in ratings. Over on reddit, this season's drop is attributed to Olicity, because Black Siren was hyped up and isn't anywhere around, because people don't like Diggle, and because Felicity's spending time with William. Tiring, sure...but it won't ever stop.

And what did they blame for the declining ratings in 5A when there was virtually no Olicity?

Edited October 28, 2017 by tv echo

[way2interested]

4 minutes ago, tv echo said:

And what did they blame for the declining ratings in 5A when there was virtually no Olicity?

The lowest rated episodes were (even though in reality 517's were the lowest) 519 and 520, so I'm guessing that's where that argument goes.

[lemotomato]

3 minutes ago, tv echo said:

And what did they blame for the declining ratings in 5A when there was virtually no Olicity?

They said that people had quit after season 4 and didn't come back for season 5. And then when Olicity/Felicity-heavy 519 and 520 aired, they pointed to the low ratings they got, ignoring the fact that the show had been preempted in top 20 Nielsen markets for those episodes.

[tv echo]

I suppose if ratings had gone up for 601-603, they would've credited Black Siren and making KC a series regular this season.

You know what? I'm not going to care about ratings. I'm just going to enjoy the ride for as long as the show lasts (or unless/until I stop enjoying it).

Edited October 28, 2017 by tv echo

[quarks]

10 hours ago, strikera0 said:

In season 2, people were blaming Laurel, Sara and Oliver/Sara for the dips in ratings. In seasons 3 and 4, Laurel was the go-to target when it came to ratings declines. Now, it's Dinah. Doesn't the blame game get old after a while?

One interesting thing about Arrow is that it is possible to trace a correlation - which is not necessarily a causation - with rises/falls in the viewer numbers and certain plot lines/characters. The key one, actually, is Oliver/Laurel - Arrow's numbers consistently dropped after any episode suggesting that Oliver/Laurel would get together, and rose after episodes where they broke up/called it off.  That was noticeable largely because it was odd - with most television couples, the pattern is either in the other direction (that is, numbers tend to go up after episodes suggesting that the couple will get together/stay together, and drop after episodes where they break up - for instance, Nick/Jess on New Girl) or there is no real pattern (Scandal).  We also saw this, more weakly, with Oliver/Felicity - particularly after breakups and/or Oliver sleeping with someone else: Arrow had a major drop in the live numbers, which turned into a trend, right after Oliver hooked up with Sara; Arrow had another major live numbers drop after the Oliver/Felicity breakup in season four - a drop the show never really recovered from.  

There's also some correlation with characters - Barry Allen, for instance. Our (ok, my) complaints on this forum about Barry aside, generally speaking, when Arrow promotes that Barry will be appearing in an upcoming episode, the live numbers go up. Notably, Barry wasn't brought in for anything other than the main crossover episode last season, and, well, the numbers kinda show that. Laurel is another example - with all of three exceptions in five years, episodes where KC/Laurel featured heavily in the promotion, and/or where interviews suggested that the next few episodes would focus on Laurel, featured drops in the live numbers.  And one of those exceptions was the season five crossover episode, where viewers were presumably turning in to see Kara and Barry, not Laurel. 

This correlation, I think, makes playing the blame game much easier - even though in nearly all cases, we can point to other reasons besides a pairing/character for the live numbers drop, and/or find an exception to the trend. For instance, the season 2 numbers drop that came right after the announcement that "the next five episodes will focus on Laurel!" also happened right after Arrow introduced superpowers to the show, a development that many fans loudly objected to.  523 was a positive Oliver/Felicity episode, suggesting that the two would get together/stay together - but it was not followed by a rise in the viewer numbers in 601. 

Right now, I would argue that the drop in season six's live broadcast numbers stem from a number of causes: the increased availability of (legal) streaming platforms, including Netflix availability for the entire season just eight days after broadcast, and as Amazon keeps informing me, to my increased annoyance, the ability to watch the CW on their little Amazon Fire stick thing (I know, Amazon, I know, now shut up); the shift to a new night/time; the NFL; the weird dissonance of Arrow claiming that it "went back to season one basics," while still featuring metahumans and flying robot balls (season one and season 2A, for all of their improbabilities, largely worked with "real world" weapons/technology); and the NFL. I'd also add that 601, in my opinion, was the weakest season premiere Arrow has ever had, which couldn't have helped. But I can also see why, after five seasons of seeing these correlations, fans are now going IT'S DINAH!   At the very least, we can say that the focus on Dinah hasn't led to an increase in the live numbers, even if arguing that she's the cause seems, to me at least, to be a much weaker argument.

Edited October 28, 2017 by quarks

[SmallScreenDiva]

1 hour ago, quarks said:

Laurel is another example - with all of three exceptions in five years, episodes where KC/Laurel featured heavily in the promotion, and/or where interviews suggested that the next few episodes would focus on Laurel, featured drops in the live numbers. 

And yet the CW spent the a good chunk of the summer pretty much promoting her (and the new bird) and this week's promo is all BS, BS, BS again. Why? There also seems to be hints that this might be a heavy Felicity episode, but like 510, why isn't it being promoted featuring people who, even though the trend is weak, are more likely to get you positive results?

[Chaser]

I've come to the conclusion that their PR has nothing to do with bringing in viewers. The Chico Strategy, it's not a winner.  

[Mrs. de Winter]

10 minutes ago, Chaser said:

I've come to the conclusion that their PR has nothing to do with bringing in viewers. The Chico Strategy, it's not a winner.

Given that the latest online spot encouraging people to stream the DC shows lists Arrow as airing on Thursdays at 8pm, I think your answer is the winning answer.  

[BkWurm1]

16 minutes ago, Mrs. de Winter said:

Given that the latest online spot encouraging people to stream the DC shows lists Arrow as airing on Thursdays at 8pm, I think your answer is the winning answer.  

It's on at 8 where I am.  :D

[Mrs. de Winter]

8 minutes ago, BkWurm1 said:

It's on at 8 where I am.  :D

Ha! I knew when I did not clarify the time zone someone would mention it!  Or perhaps that is her strategy - marketing to only a select, special few :) 

[quarks]

Well, a) from my perspective, the CW didn't spend much time this summer promoting anything except for Riverdale, and b) in general, the CW is just not all that good at promo - and definitely not just with Arrow, either. I mean, Jane the Virgin and Crazy Ex-Girlfriend are award winning shows, but would you know that from just the promos that the CW runs? Nope.  Sure, Arrow did SDCC, and Amell is doing his damnedest to promo stuff at his HVFF cons and elsewhere - but that's from the actors, not from the CW or WB. 

If you want further proof, I point you to Valor, which should have been heavily promoted as a groundbreaking show for the CW (barring the occasional mention from the Arrowverse shows or The 100, this is really the network's first military show), with lots of exciting EXPLOSIONS and INTRIGUE and DRAMA, moving the CW into NEW and EXCITING DIRECTIONS.  This did not happen. And now, here we are, with Valor not even managing to get one million viewers to tune in.

I also think two other things are going on here: one, the CW is not very interested in live numbers, thus not very interested in spending any money to improve those live numbers, and two, the CW has a show that has made it to season 13 despite years of barely getting any promo at all, much less decent promo, Supernatural, so they may be thinking they can do the same with their other shows. I'm not at all sure that what worked for Supernatural will work for any other CW show, but that's me.

Edited October 28, 2017 by quarks

[SmallScreenDiva]

35 minutes ago, quarks said:

I also think two other things are going on here: one, the CW is not very interested in live numbers, thus not very interested in spending any money to improve those live numbers,

OK, but The CW is still creating weekly promos. Why not gear those toward the stuff that at least have shown more positive results? They don't need to spend extra money, just cut and refocus the promos differently. They're not doing that. I mean, would a bunch of BS be more likely to draw more people to watch the show? 5 seasons say no.

[thegirlsleuth]

I wonder if the fact that Supernatural launched on the WB made a difference.  The WB was better at promo.  The built the audience, and all the CW had to do was keep it going.

[quarks]

1 minute ago, SmallScreenDiva said:

OK, but The CW is still creating weekly promos. Why not gear those toward the stuff that at least have shown more positive results? They don't need to spend extra money, just cut and refocus the promos differently. They're not doing that. I mean, would a bunch of BS be more likely to draw more people to watch the show? 5 seasons say no.

Well, again, I would argue that they aren't very good at this.

There may also be other background factors going on here, largely on the WB/DC side which is trying, not necessarily all that successfully, to follow the Time Warner/Kevin Tsujihara dictate of USE ALL OF DC'S PROPERTIES EXPLOIT EXPLOIT EXPLOIT YOU CAN DO IT GUYS thus the not exactly very good attempt to get lesser known comics characters like Mister Terrific and Black Siren somewhat more known.

 

2 minutes ago, thegirlsleuth said:

I wonder if the fact that Supernatural launched on the WB made a difference.  The WB was better at promo.  The built the audience, and all the CW had to do was keep it going.

 

The WB had a larger promo budget, and at least one very chatty exec who I swear must have been glued to the hip with the Wall Street Journal until Joss Whedon basically had a breakdown, and even then.  And that was also back when live numbers were more important than they are now.

[SmallScreenDiva]

9 minutes ago, quarks said:

Well, again, I would argue that they aren't very good at this.

I was going to ask how these people keep their jobs and then I remember the jerk at work who's now an AME despite being absolutely clueless. Thanks, I'll just keep repeating "they're just not good at their job" whenever I see PR/marketing fail for Arrow. Which is all the time.

[catrox14]

Supernatural has gotten shit promotion from the CW for the past few years. The thing that has worked for it is that they have their own  in-house editing team called "Shaving People, Punting Things", which is made up of a long time director and a couple of editors. They have created the best promos, teasers and trailers in years. Like movie quality work. They put them up on Vimeo and YouTube. 

I suspect it was the WB's Holly Ollis that garnered the Kansas performance and the wraparound video screens celebrating the past 12 seasons at SDCC this year. It sure made me think that this was the show's last hurrah but who knows. I doubt they'll get that much more attention from the CW promo monkeys unless they end up passing the Flash in ratings, which I highly doubt will happen.

[tv echo]

Here's an interesting article about Supernatural that might pertain to why that show has lasted so long...

TV’s new longest-running fantasy show unites Democrats and Republicans—and Russians
Ashley Rodriguez   October 12, 2017
https://qz.com/1100849/supernatural-the-tv-show-that-unites-democrats-and-republicans-and-russians/

Quote

But the protagonists, Sam and Dean Winchester, have an uncanny ability to find and retain audiences. Returning tonight on the CW channel for a 13th season, it is officially the longest-running live-action genre show currently on US TV.
*  *  *
It also is able to unite Americans in a way that few things–on TV or otherwise—are able to do in these polarized times. During the highly contentious 2016 US presidential election season, Supernatural was a rare show that was beloved by both US Democrats and Republicans, a survey by E-Poll Market Research showed. It was the favorite series among Republicans, and the third favorite among Democrats surveyed by the firm, which regularly polls US audiences about TV shows.
*  *  *
A New York Times study (paywall) that tracked Facebook likes for TV shows also found the show was especially popular in rural America, and had a “non-urban white audience pattern.” That’s only part of the picture, however, as many people do not “like” shows on Facebook, even if they are fans.

The show has won over audiences elsewhere, too. Supernatural’s biggest fanbase is now in Russia. It was roughly three times as popular there as in the US as of October 10, according to Parrot Analytics, which measures audience demand based on things like viewership, social media, fan- and critic-ratings, and piracy.
*  *  *
Globally, Supernatural was the 18th most popular TV show in October, behind the original Stephen King’s It mini-series, which was recently rebooted on the big screen, and ahead of Fox’s Gotham, according to Parrot.

Edited October 28, 2017 by tv echo

[LeighAn]

Marc also got into it on twitter with someone about ratings saying he doesn't care about live numbers because their streaming views have made up the deficit so they virtually have the same audience. He also rubbished the idea that Olicity can harm or help ratings.

 

[insomniadreams88]

I find it stupid to try to hold any one aspect of a show - especially in one episode - responsible for ratings. You can only do that if you can guarantee that every single person who may or may not watch an episode of a show has seen every bit of promotion out for it. 

For example, 603. I saw comments blaming the promotion of Olicity for the low ratings. But if you hadn’t seen the photos or the sneak peek released the day it aired, would you have known there was going to be any Olicity in the episode? General viewers are more likely to see a promo airing all week on TV than photos or clips online. 

[statsgirl]

10 hours ago, Lily-n11 said:

I think your list shows a pattern. Everytime the show tried to bring new relationships into the bunker it resulted in the sidelining of OTA interactions. Maybe that is what turned / is turning people away. Not the new characters alone but how they affected the existing relationships.

 

4 hours ago, quarks said:

I also think two other things are going on here: one, the CW is not very interested in live numbers, thus not very interested in spending any money to improve those live numbers, and two, the CW has a show that has made it to season 13 despite years of barely getting any promo at all, much less decent promo, Supernatural.  I'm not at all sure that what worked for Supernatural will work for any other CW show, but that's me.

Thirteen years in, Supernatural continues to focus on the same two (now three) characters.  Maybe that's why people remain loyal to the show.

ER lasted for 15 seasons but I'm not sure that they would have if  George Clooney and Julianna Margulies have remained on the but they would have told stories about Neela and Pratt and kept Doug and Carol in the background support the new characters.

Edited October 28, 2017 by statsgirl

[quarks]

15 hours ago, insomniadreams88 said:

For example, 603. I saw comments blaming the promotion of Olicity for the low ratings. But if you hadn’t seen the photos or the sneak peek released the day it aired, would you have known there was going to be any Olicity in the episode? General viewers are more likely to see a promo airing all week on TV than photos or clips online. 

Well, what's interesting with the Olicity trend is that it typically occurs after a positive or negative Olicity episode, not for the Olicity episode itself. Even 320 wasn't an exception here - 319 had a major scene where Felicity almost said "I love you," to Oliver, and the end of the episode made it very clear that Felicity and Ray were about to break up.   The live numbers popped up for 320. 

And it's a weak trend. I mean, sure, the live numbers might pop up for the upcoming episode, but I wouldn't put money on it.  I think it's equally possible that viewers will do exactly what MG is saying they are doing - watch something else during that timeslot (hi, NFL!) and catch up with the episode later on streaming. 

Meanwhile, I think it may be a mistake to call Nielsen viewers "general viewers."  They know they have the Nielsen box, and there's been various studies showing that that knowledge can affect viewer behavior.  Kinda the same way that knowing that networks/studios do pay attention to Twitter numbers has encouraged fans to live tweet or jump into those trending parties and so on.

[kismet]

On 10/28/2017 at 0:57 PM, SmallScreenDiva said:

And yet the CW spent the a good chunk of the summer pretty much promoting her (and the new bird) and this week's promo is all BS, BS, BS again. Why? There also seems to be hints that this might be a heavy Felicity episode, but like 510, why isn't it being promoted featuring people who, even though the trend is weak, are more likely to get you positive results?

I think they were trying to jump of the Wonder Woman bandwagon of female superheroes are cool! Look at us we have super cool female heroes/anti-heroes as well.

As for if they are keeping FS minimal in promos, I think it might go back to her not having a mask. Or the fact that Chico seems to prefer every other character over her. I do agree with whoever upthread said that promos are not necessarily designed around bringing in or keeping audiences.

3 hours ago, quarks said:

Meanwhile, I think it may be a mistake to call Nielsen viewers "general viewers."  They know they have the Nielsen box, and there's been various studies showing that that knowledge can affect viewer behavior.  Kinda the same way that knowing that networks/studios do pay attention to Twitter numbers has encouraged fans to live tweet or jump into those trending parties and so on.

I agree with this. It's known in research studies that knowledge of being in a study influences a person's behavior. If you know you have a Nielsen box, you probably do watch TV differently. I know my tweets and my streaming count for some data that is used by the networks. So therefore, I am intentional in what I stream or don't stream, or what I tweet or don't tweet. Knowing that your data is being tracked does impact what you choose to do.

Edited October 29, 2017 by kismet

[way2interested]

7 minutes ago, kismet said:

I think they were trying to jump of the Wonder Woman bandwagon of female superheroes are cool! Look at us we have super cool female heroes/anti-heroes as well

I think that this is basically all that's going on. Nothing to do with comics. That being said

8 minutes ago, kismet said:

As for if they are keeping FS minimal in promos, I think it might go back to her not having a mask.

Regardless of her having a mask or not, I think it comes down to Felicity simply not being involved in action scenes in general in the show. Action scenes (like the many BS vs. BC shots) are easier to promote, while many of Felicity's scenes so far are either regular dialogue stuff or technical spoilers. Even when they did put Felicity into promos in s5 (say 519 or 520 or even 510), they were shots of her in scenes that had her either in action shots or dramatic shots (even in the SDCC trailer her one shot was an action shot). It's a preference for action scenes which happen to be normally done by masked characters.

[kismet]

My Mum always have an expression... that "statistics lie and liars use statistics". I think TV ratings are used very much in the same way statistics are. People can manipulate and interpret ratings in whatever way suits their narratives. It's just raw data that can be used to correlate or explain whatever you are trying to explain. Likewise, if the numbers are not in your favor, you spin a narrative around why the ratings are not what is to be expected and how they still fit into your "goals" or are not anything to worry about.

I do agree that the reasons ratings drop are often explained in a way that support's a fans personal narrative. I think the writers suck at their job, so therefore I blame the drop in ratings on them. I think poor writing has lead people to walk away and that is why people won't return, because bad writing & showrunning is not something shows can overcome. Other people dislike a certain character, relationship or plotline, so when the ratings drop it must be because too much attention has been spent on that. Then they are the external reasons that always will impact a show's ratings regardless or how good/bad it is. These are neutral reasons that most people can get behind. Advertisers care about ratings because they want to sell products if they can make reach that audience in streaming numbers, they will probably be fine with that. Most advertisers do not care about the content or quality of shows they advertise in, so long as they reach a sufficient audience.

In the end, I do not know how much ratings impact Arrow, it's characters or it's plots. It seems like their are some correlations or trends that are quantifiable, but who knows what TPTB really do with that information. I think the fact that they film/write so far ahead in the season, they really can't use ratings or fan reaction to guide their narratives. It's probably why it always feels insufficient how they repair their missteps. Or frustrating, that what appears to be an obvious mistake or solution is not identified by TPTB or the writers. Ultimately, I think as a fan of a show pinning too many of your hopes or interpretations on the ratings is just not a good plan. Luckily for fans of CW shows, the CW seems least interested in ratings* of all the Big 5. The CW have a long standing history of using ratings as only a part of the equation when it comes to supporting or renewing shows.

Edited October 29, 2017 by kismet
* typo, originally had fans instead of ratings, CW loves having fans

[kismet]

10 minutes ago, way2interested said:

Regardless of her having a mask or not, I think it comes down to Felicity simply not being involved in action scenes in general in the show. Action scenes (like the many BS vs. BC shots) are easier to promote, while many of Felicity's scenes so far are either regular dialogue stuff or technical spoilers. Even when they did put Felicity into promos in s5 (say 519 or 520 or even 510), they were shots of her in scenes that had her either in action shots or dramatic shots (even in the SDCC trailer her one shot was an action shot). It's a preference for action scenes which happen to be normally done by masked characters.

There is probably a lot of truth to this. It's one of the main reasons I changed my mind about wanting FS in a mask after s3 when it became obvious that Arrow was becoming more action and mask focused. I wanted her front and center in the show in all aspects and in my mind, a mask would help her achieve this goal. I never thought she needed a mask. I would have preferred she didn't need to have one. But the show was evolving and I thought it would help. Also EBR has shown an exceptional talent at filming action scenes, so having her more in them would imo make a better show.

[Starfish35]

I'm never totally sure whether to post this here or in Mind Your Surroundings, but here's the unrounded finals for last week from RJK, the poster at Spotted Ratings who supplies the unrounded numbers.

Quote

Here were last week's (Oct. 23-29) unrounded FINALS for the CW shows (along with L3 that's available):

....................................... L+SD ........... L+3 ...
The Flash ....................... 0.998 .......... 1.57
Supernatural .................. 0.641 ........... 0.94
Riverdale ........................ 0.609 .......... 1.02
Supergirl ......................... 0.534 .......... 0.82
Arrow .............................. 0.476 .......... 0.80
Legends of Tomorrow .... 0.472 ........... 0.73
Jane the Virgin ............... 0.258
Dynasty .......................... 0.196 ........... 0.29
Crazy Ex-Girlfriend ......... 0.192
Valor ............................... 0.186 .......... 0.24

[Starfish35]

I think it's safe to say that Valor is dead, and Dynasty probably is too.  

[Belinea]

16 hours ago, Starfish35 said:

and Dynasty probably is too.

Dynasty might still be a profit because they already have a Netflix deal and I think that it has been sold to many parts of the Netflix world. So that one might/could stick around even if its numbers are bad. 

Edited November 1, 2017 by Belinea

[Morrigan2575]

Just to check TNF doesn't preempt anything while airing on CBS/NBS right? In the past it was only simulcast in the local markets when it aired on NFL network, I think.

This week it's Bills vs Jets so, I got a little worried about preemptions in NYC. I need my boys, plus I think 604 is 

Spoiler

Going to be way more Felicity/Helix/Michael Emerson and less BS than the promo indicates

[Velocity23]

I am still wondering if CW gonna label the episode they air on Thanksgiving a special, so they dont count to regular ratings. 

[SmallScreenDiva]

Well, Marc keeps saying live ratings don't matter so *shrug*

[tv echo]

My local movie theaters have scheduled Thor: Ragnarok show times for tonight (Thursday) starting at 7:00pm, 7:30pm, 8:00pm, 8:30pm, etc.  So, yeah, I'm wondering if that will impact Arrow ratings.

Edited November 2, 2017 by tv echo

[Soulfire]

[Morrigan2575]

Pretty much no change for either show. I expect Arrow won't see much of a change until post crossover (for a bit).

Except of course for tanksgiving

[SmallScreenDiva]

I know I harp on the promos for this show but OMG, there was no hint whatsoever from the promos that this would be a) Felicity-centric b) loaded with Olicity, two things that FOR FIVE FUCKING SEASONS NOW The CW has to know are things people like watching. How is this much incompetence not questioned?!?!

[EmilyBettFan]

I'm so tired of the useless promo of BS screeching. They keep posting about her also on instagram arrow. Really want to tell them to F off.

Edited November 3, 2017 by EmilyBettFan