Jump to content

[Spoilers] Season 11 Discussion Thread


Tensor
 Share

Recommended Posts

Others have answered, but since you quoted me, here I go...

2 hours ago, Chrismo said:

And so? I never watch any of the other shows so their ratings are meaningless.

Ratings are used by the network, to decide which shows to keep on their schedule, and the advertisers, to decide where to spend their money.  To do this, they compare the ratings of all the shows to make those determinations.   If the other shows ratings are meaningless to you, then so are TBBT ratings, because you're using them not as they are designed to be used.   Comparisons are the whole purpose of ratings, if you choose not to compare them, then you're misusing them.  

 

2 hours ago, Chrismo said:

I will give you an offbeat example of my logic. Let's say my daughter got a D last semester in Physics. That's a below average grade. When I asked about it she said everyone else failed(an F) including her frIends Lisa and Dana. Should I be happy? Lisa and Dana to me compare to Empire or Will and Grace. I'm not Lisa or Dana's parents so I can't be concerned with them. Thus I'm not concerned with those other shows since I don't watch them.

An example that breaks down.  Would you be happy if everyone in the class got "A"s, if everyone in class got an extra 34 unearned points added to their class average?    Here's a better example, the physics department has been lowering grades for the last 17 years, by taking away 2 points, per year, off of the student's class average.  At this point, they are taking off 34 points off of each students grades and are only passing along the top 10 students. So,  yes you should be happy as your daughter is at the top of her class, because of what the department is doing.  Because that is the exact situation for TBBT.  Network viewing has been dropping for the last 17 years or so, all the shows are dropping, and still TBBT is at the top of the ratings.  Look, TBBT was an iffy renewal, in 67th place, back in 2007, with a 3.26.  It was number one last year with a 3.10.   CBS would much rather have the number one show at 3.10 rather than the 67th ranked show at 3.26.

If you want to rail on about the ratings, that's fine, but you should use them properly, which requires comparisons.  

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bfm said:

She said that Howard and Raj were gay without even knowing them. She thinks her son, a brilliant Physicist, is a failure. She may be funny but she's not thay good at capturing people. 

Actually, she said Howard and Raj had an, "ersatz homosexual marriage". She never actually said they were gay. Beverly is never going to win an award for mother of the year. She's about as maternal as a bowling ball, and she's more Sheldon than Sheldon ever was. From her perspective Leonard is a failure when compared to his siblings. That might not be a nice viewpoint, and I certainly do not perceive him to be a failure, but when compared to his brother and sister he hasn't succeeded on the same level.

Edited by HeWolf
  • Like 1
  • Koala Face 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Chrismo said:

I don't disagree with your logic. My point was more that less people are watching. I haven't heard anything for why less people are watching. All I have gotten is comparisons.

I've given you reasons before.   More channel choices, internet, streaming, are all reasons (based on surveys) as to why network viewership is down.   In general, older people watch more network television, as they were brought up on network television.  Middle age people tend to watch both cable channels and network, while younger people tend to stream, and not watch network.  

Those that watch the most network television are dying off, and the younger people, with their streaming habits are not replacing them as viewers of network television.  As a result, you have fewer viewers of network television.  That's why all show's ratings are dropping, and why you have to compare the various ratings.  

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, veejay said:

Yippie, now I found the statistical proof of my imagined youthfulness. :icon_cheesygrin:

That's why I said, "In general..."  There are exceptions.  I, for instance, only have coax cable running from my antenna, to each of the televisions via a splitter.  I get network, and local over the air through the antenna.   As for cable,  I recently replaced all the TV coax with Cat6A network cable.  That connects to my cable service, and then through the router to my Roku, Playstation four (my other streaming device) for my Playstation Vue and my Netflix and Amazon.   I also have my desktop, and my wife's laptop (although she can disconnect an use wi-fi) physically connected to my home network.   I still have wifi for our phones, our other laptop, my daughters laptop and phone, and our apple TV.  I don't know any other 61 year olds doing all that streaming and that have cat6A network cable through their house (that they ran no less.).  My friends think I'm nuts.   Some even still have landlines for their phones.  But I took my first computer class in 1969 (I was 14) and bought my first computer in 1978.

  • Like 3
  • Penny Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HeWolf said:

Actually, she said Howard and Raj had an, "ersatz homosexual marriage". She never actually said they were gay. Beverly is never going to win an award for mother of the year. She's about as maternal as a bowling ball, and she's more Sheldon than Sheldon ever was. From her perspective Leonard is a failure when compared to his siblings. That might not be a nice viewpoint, and I certainly do not perceive him to be a failure, but when compared to his brother and sister he hasn't succeeded on the same level.

I don't think it was an ersatz homosexual marriage either... And in a later episode she talked about their latent homosexuality and thought Bernadette was made up. And she usually doesn't specify she sees him as a failure compared to his siblings (which he is still not, less successful would be the correct term), if you go by her descriptions of Leonard you would expect a different person.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, HeWolf said:

Actually, she said Howard and Raj had an, "ersatz homosexual marriage". She never actually said they were gay. Beverly is never going to win an award for mother of the year. She's about as maternal as a bowling ball, and she's more Sheldon than Sheldon ever was. From her perspective Leonard is a failure when compared to his siblings. That might not be a nice viewpoint, and I certainly do not perceive him to be a failure, but when compared to his brother and sister he hasn't succeeded on the same level.

I think we need to revisit and find out more regarding Leonard's siblings.  (I may get things wrong, but...).  His brother has argued cases before the Supreme Court and is a young partner at a prestigious firm and may or may not have done something at Harvard.  His sister is working on a cure for diabetes.  Okay.  Nice job there unseen Hofstadters.  We know nothing of their IQ rankings.  We do know that Leonard possess an IQ of 173. Clearly genius level (despite what Sheldon says).  We know that he worked for Stephen Hawking on an expedition to the North Sea.  Clearly a prestigious project.  We know that he worked on a top-secret government project that although curtailed was successful.  There are other things we could list regarding his accomplishments.  I would venture to say that he has surpassed these supposedly superior unseen and largely unknown personas.....

  • Like 2
  • Penny Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Tensor said:

I've given you reasons before.   More channel choices, internet, streaming, are all reasons (based on surveys) as to why network viewership is down.   In general, older people watch more network television, as they were brought up on network television.  Middle age people tend to watch both cable channels and network, while younger people tend to stream, and not watch network.  

Those that watch the most network television are dying off, and the younger people, with their streaming habits are not replacing them as viewers of network television.  As a result, you have fewer viewers of network television.  That's why all show's ratings are dropping, and why you have to compare the various ratings.  

Those are general reasons which IMO are all correct but I don't think that covers every reason a particular shows ratings goes down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tensor said:

That's why I said, "In general..."  There are exceptions.  I, for instance, only have coax cable running from my antenna, to each of the televisions via a splitter.  I get network, and local over the air through the antenna.   As for cable,  I recently replaced all the TV coax with Cat6A network cable.  That connects to my cable service, and then through the router to my Roku, Playstation four (my other streaming device) for my Playstation Vue and my Netflix and Amazon.   I also have my desktop, and my wife's laptop (although she can disconnect an use wi-fi) physically connected to my home network.   I still have wifi for our phones, our other laptop, my daughters laptop and phone, and our apple TV.  I don't know any other 61 year olds doing all that streaming and that have cat6A network cable through their house (that they ran no less.).  My friends think I'm nuts.   Some even still have landlines for their phones.  But I took my first computer class in 1969 (I was 14) and bought my first computer in 1978.

Ha! My throw-in was meant to be a spontaneous joke. Unfortunately, the fact that we oldtimers have a mostly elaborate technical knowledge is hardly noticed by many of the younger people. :shy:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, hokie3457 said:

I think we need to revisit and find out more regarding Leonard's siblings.  (I may get things wrong, but...).  His brother has argued cases before the Supreme Court and is a young partner at a prestigious firm and may or may not have done something at Harvard.  His sister is working on a cure for diabetes.  Okay.  Nice job there unseen Hofstadters.  We know nothing of their IQ rankings.  We do know that Leonard possess an IQ of 173. Clearly genius level (despite what Sheldon says).  We know that he worked for Stephen Hawking on an expedition to the North Sea.  Clearly a prestigious project.  We know that he worked on a top-secret government project that although curtailed was successful.  There are other things we could list regarding his accomplishments.  I would venture to say that he has surpassed these supposedly superior unseen and largely unknown personas.....

I suppose they were implying that they're all geniuses. And Michael is a tenured professor at Harvard. 

I do agree that he had many accomplishments since Beverly's first appearance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, veejay said:

Yippie, now I found the statistical proof of my imagined youthfulness. :icon_cheesygrin:

 

23 minutes ago, Lagernisse said:

You know @veejay age is just a number. :icon_cheesygrin:

Indeed! I put my money on as we are younger of mind than many people of twenties, lol! And we have a sense of humour much better too! :icon_cheesygrin:

 

Edited by spidergirl
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bfm said:

I don't think it was an ersatz homosexual marriage either... And in a later episode she talked about their latent homosexuality and thought Bernadette was made up. And she usually doesn't specify she sees him as a failure compared to his siblings (which he is still not, less successful would be the correct term), if you go by her descriptions of Leonard you would expect a different person.

I don't know if it was or not. That is what she called it. Her exact words: 

Beverly Hofstadter: It might explain why the two of you have created an ersatz homosexual marriage to satisfy your need for intimacy. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Tensor said:

That's why I said, "In general..."  There are exceptions.  I, for instance, only have coax cable running from my antenna, to each of the televisions via a splitter.  I get network, and local over the air through the antenna.   As for cable,  I recently replaced all the TV coax with Cat6A network cable.  That connects to my cable service, and then through the router to my Roku, Playstation four (my other streaming device) for my Playstation Vue and my Netflix and Amazon.   I also have my desktop, and my wife's laptop (although she can disconnect an use wi-fi) physically connected to my home network.   I still have wifi for our phones, our other laptop, my daughters laptop and phone, and our apple TV.  I don't know any other 61 year olds doing all that streaming and that have cat6A network cable through their house (that they ran no less.).  My friends think I'm nuts.   Some even still have landlines for their phones.  But I took my first computer class in 1969 (I was 14) and bought my first computer in 1978.

Hoping to follow in some of those footsteps.  Getting fed-up with the cable company.  Looking at other alternatives....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Chrismo said:

Those are general reasons which IMO are all correct but I don't think that covers every reason a particular shows ratings goes down.

But that's not what you said, is it?  Here, I'll help:

Quote

I haven't heard anything for why less people are watching. All I have gotten is comparisons.

I was just pointing out that you have heard reasons, not just comparisons.  And, why would an explanation as to the reasons have to cover every eventuality?   People move away from shows for various reasons, but if you have less people watching network television, you are going to have lower ratings for every show.  

Here's an example.  On Monday night, during 2004-2005, the total viewers, at 8 PM for all networks was 61 million people and last week, Monday night at 8 PM came in with 38 million people, that's 23 million less people watching network television.  Both those hours, in 2005 and 2017 contained the number one entertainment show, so is it really a surprise that rating are lower, when there aren't as many people watching?    BTW, the number one show in 2004 (American Idol) had 44% of the total viewers at 8 PM.  TBBT is right in the ballpark at 40% of the viewers at 8 PM.  

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Tensor said:

That's why I said, "In general..."  There are exceptions.  I, for instance, only have coax cable running from my antenna, to each of the televisions via a splitter.  I get network, and local over the air through the antenna.   As for cable,  I recently replaced all the TV coax with Cat6A network cable.  That connects to my cable service, and then through the router to my Roku, Playstation four (my other streaming device) for my Playstation Vue and my Netflix and Amazon.   I also have my desktop, and my wife's laptop (although she can disconnect an use wi-fi) physically connected to my home network.   I still have wifi for our phones, our other laptop, my daughters laptop and phone, and our apple TV.  I don't know any other 61 year olds doing all that streaming and that have cat6A network cable through their house (that they ran no less.).  My friends think I'm nuts.   Some even still have landlines for their phones.  But I took my first computer class in 1969 (I was 14) and bought my first computer in 1978.

Don't you ? Bwahahahaha. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Tensor said:

But that's not what you said, is it?  Here, I'll help:

I was just pointing out that you have heard reasons, not just comparisons.  And, why would an explanation as to the reasons have to cover every eventuality?   People move away from shows for various reasons, but if you have less people watching network television, you are going to have lower ratings for every show.  

Here's an example.  On Monday night, during 2004-2005, the total viewers, at 8 PM for all networks was 61 million people and last week, Monday night at 8 PM came in with 38 million people, that's 23 million less people watching network television.  Both those hours, in 2005 and 2017 contained the number one entertainment show, so is it really a surprise that rating are lower, when there aren't as many people watching?    BTW, the number one show in 2004 (American Idol) had 44% of the total viewers at 8 PM.  TBBT is right in the ballpark at 40% of the viewers at 8 PM.  

I will try a different way. DWTS is on Monday nights, Correct if I'm wrong but I believe their rating are down similarily. I would guess there audience is the senior citizen crowd and thus ratings  shouldn't  be affected by other  avenues. So how is that explained?

Edited by Chrismo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chrismo said:

I will try a different way. DWTS is on Monday nights, Correct if I'm wrong but I believe their rating are down similarily. I would guess there audience is the senior citizen crowd and thus ratings  should be affected by other ways avenues. So how is that explained?

Not to interrupt the conversation, but I'll add my two cents.... DWTS is a different sort of animal.  You would think that ballroom dancing shows would attact a older demographic, but I think there is a larger youthful audience.  One of the main drivers of DWTS is the celebrities participating in each season/series.  I'm not sure who is dancing this time around as I don't watch (and I'm 60, btw....), but I will be willing to bet that it could be a factor in them being down (as well as the typical viewer drop-off because of other things attracting attention...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hokie3457 said:

Not to interrupt the conversation, but I'll add my two cents.... DWTS is a different sort of animal.  You would think that ballroom dancing shows would attact a older demographic, but I think there is a larger youthful audience.  One of the main drivers of DWTS is the celebrities participating in each season/series.  I'm not sure who is dancing this time around as I don't watch (and I'm 60, btw....), but I will be willing to bet that it could be a factor in them being down (as well as the typical viewer drop-off because of other things attracting attention...)

I still think though their main audience is like my Mom. 80 and doesn't DVR it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Tensor locked this topic
  • Tensor unlocked this topic
  • Tensor locked and unlocked this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...