Ratings Climb a Notch

[J_Crews]

One thing that sucks, but we may just have to accept, is that GoT may never reach True Blood levels; the medieval fantasy genre just doesn't draw as many viewers as contemporary vampire stuff.

[Padraig]

Not enough positive momentum for it, really.

I'm curious about this positive momentum. The media reviews are very positive. More positive than S1 AFAICT. GoT gets a lot of attention in the US, so you can't ask for much more there.

Amongst book fans, we may prefer S1 but we are watching the show anyhow, so that doesn't matter.

OTOH it is a difficult show to get involved half-way through. And that might be defining the ceiling for S2. I can't see anything different about S3, if that is the case. It will hopefully pick up more viewers before that season airs but picking them up mid-season might be optimistic.

[Faint]

One thing that sucks, but we may just have to accept, is that GoT may never reach True Blood levels; the medieval fantasy genre just doesn't draw as many viewers as contemporary vampire stuff.

OTOH it is a difficult show to get involved half-way through. And that might be defining the ceiling for S2. I can't see anything different about S3, if that is the case. It will hopefully pick up more viewers before that season airs but picking them up mid-season might be optimistic.

I'm very interested to see what type of ratings it gets for the season premier next season. That will probably determine whether the audience is maxed out or not. I think it unlikely that it will pick-up viewers after that because it would require a lot of catching-up but you never know.

Can it reach True Blood levels? It's not inconceivable. That show reached a high of 5.3 in its second year and no episode since has rated higher than a 5.5. So it seems to have plateaued at around a 5.0 on average.

Game of Thrones did bring at least a million extra viewers between the first and second season. The question is, can it repeat the trick?

[Lyonel B]

One thing that sucks, but we may just have to accept, is that GoT may never reach True Blood levels; the medieval fantasy genre just doesn't draw as many viewers as contemporary vampire stuff.

I'm absolutely stunned the show has done as well as it has. This is a heavily serialised, niche genre show that has managed to overcome every obstacle and become a mainstream hit. The current figures are outstanding.

[boojam]

One thing that sucks, but we may just have to accept, is that GoT may never reach True Blood levels; the medieval fantasy genre just doesn't draw as many viewers as contemporary vampire stuff.

Lord! My fun fatigue threshold for vampires and zombies was exceeded years and years ago.

[boojam]

Isn't it about time to give up on the TV show? The characters are now so significantly different that it's hard to consider it a part of a Song of Ice and Fire.

Here's your program: You stop watching it. That should fix your problem.

[Buster]

The ratings are good, the reviews are good, the show is good and the fanbase is growing. No need to worry. And for everyone that is worried about True Blood getting higher ratings, it's inevitable. Horny teenagers will always outnumber GoT fans and the show is doing much better than other shows in the genre.

[Mulled Wino]

The ratings are good, the reviews are good, the show is good and the fanbase is growing. No need to worry. And for everyone that is worried about True Blood getting higher ratings, it's inevitable. Horny teenagers will always outnumber GoT fans and the show is doing much better than other shows in the genre.

so will idiots, the real reason True Blood does so well.

[Faint]

I worry about the long-term ratings simply because they have to be high enough for HBO to justify blowing $75 million or more a season on the show. It would be really difficult, if not impossible, to maintain a loyal audience of around 4 million through a decade of seasons. Television show viewership figures tend to resemble a bell curve over the lifespan of any one show where there is a steady increase to a high point followed by a steady decrease (and that's if the show is especially successful). Sometimes there is even a sharp rise or a sharp fall but, either way, it is something beyond rare for a show to have a relatively stable audience through the majority of its run (Seinfeld and Friends come to mind). That being the case, I think Game of Thrones has to build to an audience of at least 7 or 8 million around its midpoint for there to be any shot that the entire series gets made.

[Padraig]

That being the case, I think Game of Thrones has to build to an audience of at least 7 or 8 million around its midpoint for there to be any shot that the entire series gets made.

For first viewing? I don't think that will ever happen. When did a HBO show get close to those numbers? OTOH, HBO said that each episode has an average number of viewers in S1 of around 12m IIRC. But that's over long a period of time.

Hopefully viewers will increase further in S3 but that will really depend on how well S2 ends with E9 and E10. The ending of S1 drove S2 viewership. So we'll see how well the Blackwater goes. :)

[Spring Bass]

The ratings don't really matter so long as HBO thinks the show will sell a bunch of Blu-Ray boxsets (which it did for season one), generate buzz and publicity for HBO (which it does, in spades), and keep/maintain their subscriber account (which the steady ratings are good for, because they indicate that there is an audience that follows the show almost religiously). The last one is the most important, since something like 80% of HBO's revenue comes from the cable providers.

Sure, the show probably costs them $60-70 million to produce this season, but part of that is one-off expenses for major events like Blackwater, and good cable shows in general are getting more expensive. Mad Menwill run about $35-40 million this year, Boardwalk Empire cost over $50 million for the first season, Luck cost $35 million to cancel production just on this season, and The Borgias runs about $50 million+ a season. Game of Thrones isn't that much more expensive, and it's still much less expensive than the $100 million/season costs that HBO was spending on Rome (which they regret cancelling).

[Faint]

When did a HBO show get close to those numbers?

Season averages for The Sopranos:

Season 1: 3.46

Season 2: 6.62

Season 3: 8.87

Season 4: 10.99

Season 5: 9.80

Season 6 (Part 1): 8.60

Season 6 (Part 2): 8.23

An extreme example to be sure but, the point is, it has happened before and it is possible. Incidentally, as many will note, even The Sopranos conformed to the bell curve paradigm, gaining steam up to the 4th season and declining thereafter.

[boojam]

The ratings don't really matter so long as HBO thinks the show will sell a bunch of Blu-Ray boxsets (which it did for season one), generate buzz and publicity for HBO (which it does, in spades), and keep/maintain their subscriber account (which the steady ratings are good for, because they indicate that there is an audience that follows the show almost religiously). The last one is the most important, since something like 80% of HBO's revenue comes from the cable providers.

What were the final , well maybe not final yet, world wide DVD sales?

Also HBO has been working on improving their non North American distribution of their shows ... it that succeeds their foreign take might be large.

I still have not seen any thing about the popularity of this show outside of Europe.

[Spring Bass]

The Numbers is putting it at 820,000 DVDs so far in 2012. I haven't been able to find Blu Ray Sales numbers, but the show's composition of sales was more than 50% Blu-Ray back in March. If that held up, then add another couple hundred thousand blu-ray copies to its overall sales.

[Ferrum Aeternum]

An extreme example to be sure but, the point is, it has happened before and it is possible.

An extreme example, to be sure. The Sopranos had mass-market appeal across all demographics, something Game of Thrones simply will never have because of the unshakeable perception certain segments of the population have regarding the subject matter (i.e., fantasy sucks, is for kids, is stupid, is boring, etc.).

That being said, I do believe the ratings will continue to grow at least through Season 4 and will get a bump each time from new viewers who are picking up the series as they go (many of whom purchase DVD sets between seasons or receive them as a gift). There's simply too much positive buzz and momentum right now, as well as too much great story left to tell, for this thing to slow down anytime soon.

I hold less optimism for what comes after ASOS...but perhaps by then the core audience will be hardcore enough for high ratings to at least plateau.

[Padraig]

An extreme example, to be sure.

Yes. Exactly. Making the Soprano's the target is a sure way to end up with dissappointment. Right now, I would be hugely impressed and surprised if it replicates True Bloods peak but some more growth is definitely possible.

[J_Crews]

Lord! My fun fatigue threshold for vampires and zombies was exceeded years and years ago.

I enjoy True Blood, but only because it's campy as all get out. I too was very sick of zombie-related stuff, but the Walking Dead cured me of that... that damn show keeps me on the edge of my seat! :)

[rickard]

Twelve 60 min episodes would be a minimum to accomplish better story-telling/character development. Of course, I'd prefer 20 per book, but that will never happen. Maybe for Storm. I really noticed early on in this season that you miss certian characters during an episode. Where is Arya one week? Where is Danerys the other? What is Bran Doing? Haven't heard peep from Melisandre in awhile.

[Castel]

I'm absolutely stunned the show has done as well as it has. This is a heavily serialised, niche genre show that has managed to overcome every obstacle and become a mainstream hit. The current figures are outstanding.

Pretty much, the mainstream success of this show has been ridiculous. It is a fantasy series after all.

The ratings don't really matter so long as HBO thinks the show will sell a bunch of Blu-Ray boxsets (which it did for season one), generate buzz and publicity for HBO (which it does, in spades), and keep/maintain their subscriber account (which the steady ratings are good for, because they indicate that there is an audience that follows the show almost religiously). The last one is the most important, since something like 80% of HBO's revenue comes from the cable providers. Sure, the show probably costs them $60-70 million to produce this season, but part of that is one-off expenses for major events like Blackwater, and good cable shows in general are getting more expensive. Mad Menwill run about $35-40 million this year, Boardwalk Empire cost over $50 million for the first season, Luck cost $35 million to cancel production just on this season, and The Borgias runs about $50 million+ a season. Game of Thrones isn't that much more expensive, and it's still much less expensive than the $100 million/season costs that HBO was spending on Rome (which they regret cancelling).

Yup, HBO seems to have come to a new understanding on things like Rome, where they probably made the wrong decision based on ratings. And if I recall they have more effective money on this show since they are filming in locations that have lower taxes etc,..

Season averages for The Sopranos: Season 1: 3.46 Season 2: 6.62 Season 3: 8.87 Season 4: 10.99 Season 5: 9.80 Season 6 (Part 1): 8.60 Season 6 (Part 2): 8.23 An extreme example to be sure but, the point is, it has happened before and it is possible. Incidentally, as many will note, even The Sopranos conformed to the bell curve paradigm, gaining steam up to the 4th season and declining thereafter.

Sopranos was about the Mafia, a topic that has a lot of mainstream appeal, comparing it to a genre whose fanbase is still mocked as being basement-dwelling nerds is a bit much.

I enjoy True Blood, but only because it's campy as all get out. I too was very sick of zombie-related stuff, but the Walking Dead cured me of that... that damn show keeps me on the edge of my seat! :)

True Blood is great if you can turn off the part of your brain that recognises morality and realises that everyone on the show is a despicable bastard, I generally can't.Which is par for the course for me when it comes to vampires. Walking Dead...I used to like, until it became slower and truer to the genre i.e. everyone becomes an idiot, but goddamn, when the zombies come out, you're on the edge of your seat.

Well, I'm curious as to whether we'll get a fourth season, but I guess that depends on the drop-off (which could be massive), hopefully they can keep people interested.

[Faint]

Sopranos was about the Mafia, a topic that has a lot of mainstream appeal, comparing it to a genre whose fanbase is still mocked as being basement-dwelling nerds is a bit much.

Yes. Exactly. Making the Soprano's the target is a sure way to end up with dissappointment. Right now, I would be hugely impressed and surprised if it replicates True Bloods peak but some more growth is definitely possible.

An extreme example, to be sure. The Sopranos had mass-market appeal across all demographics, something Game of Thrones simply will never have because of the unshakeable perception certain segments of the population have regarding the subject matter (i.e., fantasy sucks, is for kids, is stupid, is boring, etc.).

I just used The Sopranos as an example. I'm not under the delusion that Game of Thrones will ever reach that level of mainstream success.

That said, I do hope it might eventually reach The Walking Dead territory and get into the 7.0 to 8.0 range. I think it necessary it does so in order to complete the entire book series given the bell curve like trend of television show ratings I mentioned above.

As it is, I'm somewhat in disbelief that twice as many people tune into a zombie show than Game of Thrones.*

* I realize HBO has roughly 28 million subscribers to AMC's +95 million but the fact still shocks me.