|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: UCLANUCLAN Date: Nov 19, 2007 12:55
Invid Fan wrote:
>>With the help of Football overrun and no competition from Extreme Makeover,
>>TAR is able to gain back some viewers last night
>
> There wasn't an overrun in all markets (none here in Buffalo)
|
| |
|
| | 85 Comments |
|
|
Author: ObveeusObveeus Date: Nov 19, 2007 13:06
"UCLAN" thanks.org> wrote in message
news:YKm0j.25709$L15.24556@newsfe08.phx...> Invid Fan wrote:
>
>>>With the help of Football overrun and no competition from Extreme
>>>Makeover,
>>>TAR is able to gain back some viewers last night
>>
>> There wasn't an overrun in all markets (none here in Buffalo)
>
> Since CBS did NOT have a double-header this week, some markets only
> had an early game. CBS's only late game - Pittsburgh/NY Jets - was
> seen by less than 20%% of the country.
>
> http://www.the506.com/nflmaps/2007-11-CBS.html
20%% in area maybe, but that looks like much more than 20%% in
population/viewers.
|
| |
|
| | 44 Comments |
|
|
Author: UCLANUCLAN Date: Nov 19, 2007 23:55
Obveeus wrote:
>>Since CBS did NOT have a double-header this week, some markets only
>>had an early game. CBS's only late game - Pittsburgh/NY Jets - was
>>seen by less than 20%% of the country.
>>
>> http://www.the506.com/nflmaps/2007-11-CBS.html>
> 20%% in area maybe, but that looks like much more than 20%% in
> population/viewers.
Much more? That I doubt. Virtually nothing west of the Mississippi. They
didn't even get all of NY. Perhaps you ought to define "much."
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Ken McElhaneyKen McElhaney Date: Nov 20, 2007 07:27
On Nov 20, 1:55 am, UCLAN thanks.org> wrote:> Obveeus wrote:
>>>Since CBS did NOT have a double-header this week, some markets only
>>>had an early game. CBS's only late game - Pittsburgh/NY Jets - was
>>>seen by less than 20%% of the country.
>
>
>> 20%% in area maybe, but that looks like much more than 20%% in
>> population/viewers.
>
> Much more? That I doubt. Virtually nothing west of the Mississippi. They
> didn't even get all of NY. Perhaps you ought to define "much."
Well, the late game was seen in Houston. Would Houston be considered
"much"?
Ken
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Barbara L SherrillBarbara L Sherrill Date: Nov 20, 2007 07:42
> On Nov 20, 1:55 am, UCLAN thanks.org> wrote:>> Obveeus wrote:
>>>>Since CBS did NOT have a double-header this week, some markets only
>>>>had an early game. CBS's only late game - Pittsburgh/NY Jets - was
>>>>seen by less than 20%% of the country.
>>
>>
>>> 20%% in area maybe, but that looks like much more than 20%% in
>>> population/viewers.
>>
>> Much more? That I doubt. Virtually nothing west of the Mississippi. They
>> didn't even get all of NY. Perhaps you ought to define "much."
>
> Well, the late game was seen in Houston. Would Houston be considered
> "much"?
>
> Ken ...
|
| Show full article (0.84Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Ken McElhaneyKen McElhaney Date: Nov 20, 2007 07:59
On Nov 20, 9:42 am, "Barbara L Sherrill"
sbcglobal.net> wrote:>> On Nov 20, 1:55 am, UCLAN thanks.org> wrote:>>> Obveeus wrote:
>>>>>Since CBS did NOT have a double-header this week, some markets only
>>>>>had an early game. CBS's only late game - Pittsburgh/NY Jets - was
>>>>>seen by less than 20%% of the country.
>
>
>>>> 20%% in area maybe, but that looks like much more than 20%% in
>>>> population/viewers. ...
|
| Show full article (1.04Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Barbara L SherrillBarbara L Sherrill Date: Nov 20, 2007 08:18
> On Nov 20, 9:42 am, "Barbara L Sherrill"
> sbcglobal.net> wrote:>> "Ken McElhaney" hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:f8a57e83-a081-4854-9cc8-0ac8dd8ce1d3@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> On Nov 20, 1:55 am, UCLAN thanks.org> wrote:>>>> Obveeus wrote:
>>>>>>Since CBS did NOT have a double-header this week, some markets only
>>>>>>had an early game. CBS's only late game - Pittsburgh/NY Jets - was
>>>>>>seen by less than 20%% of the country.
>>
>> ...
|
| Show full article (1.28Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: UCLANUCLAN Date: Nov 20, 2007 12:16
Ken McElhaney wrote:
>>>20%% in area maybe, but that looks like much more than 20%% in
>>>population/viewers.
>>
>>Much more? That I doubt. Virtually nothing west of the Mississippi. They
>>didn't even get all of NY. Perhaps you ought to define "much."
>
> Well, the late game was seen in Houston. Would Houston be considered
> "much"?
Considering that "much" was in reference to "much more than 20%%", no.
Houston isn't more than 20%%.
|
| |
| 11 Comments |
|
|
Author: ObveeusObveeus Date: Nov 20, 2007 13:44
"Barbara L Sherrill" sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Houston considered to be anything worth while? ;/
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ken McElhaneyKen McElhaney Date: Nov 20, 2007 20:10
On Nov 20, 2:16 pm, UCLAN thanks.org> wrote:> Ken McElhaney wrote:
>>>>20%% in area maybe, but that looks like much more than 20%% in
>>>>population/viewers.
>
>>>Much more? That I doubt. Virtually nothing west of the Mississippi. They
>>>didn't even get all of NY. Perhaps you ought to define "much."
>
>> Well, the late game was seen in Houston. Would Houston be considered
>> "much"?
>
> Considering that "much" was in reference to "much more than 20%%", no.
> Houston isn't more than 20%%.
True.
But Houston as the #10 Nielsen TV market is certainly more than
"virtually nothing west of the Mississippi" as you worded it. So it
seems we both missed the mark here.
Ken
|
| |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
|
|
