> Advertisers eager to reach a young demographic initially clamored to
> sign on to the CW, but have since cooled to the network. Steven Kalb,
> director of broadcast media for media-buying firm MediaHub, owned by
> Interpublic Group, says there were high hopes for the network when
> last year's lineup was unveiled. Now, he says, "It has collapsed."
>
> Part of the problem is that the CW's young audience is most prone to
> spend leisure time on the Internet. Last winter's Hollywood writers'
> strike, which forced scripted shows off the air for three months,
> hastened the defection of viewers to the Web.
>
> Also this spring, the CW elected to stop airing wrestling on Friday
> nights -- an admission that chasing a young male audience was no
> longer part of the network's mission. Wrestling had drawn high
> ratings, but advertising rates were lower because it draws an audience
> less desirable to advertisers. At its upfront presentation this week,
> the CW redefined its target audience as exclusively 18- to 34-year-old
> women.
>
> CW executives attribute the network's poor ratings performance not to ...

> Combined, UPN and the WB lost about $2 billion in the 11 years that
> spent on the air.

>> Combined, UPN and the WB lost about $2 billion in the 11 years that
>> spent on the air.

>
> I'd be interested in seeing the separate losses for the two networks.
> UPN never developed a hit show that didn't have the name "Star Trek"
> attached to it (and even Enterprise didn't do all that well). WB,
> meanwhile, had Dawson's Creek, Gilmore Girls, Buffy, Smallville,
> Angel. I've really kind of been surprised from the day CW was
> announced that the two networks "merged" like this. UPN I could easily
> see folding, but WB seemed to be strong enough to survive.
>
> Mike

>On May 16, 1:14 pm, mike9...@postmark.net wrote:

>> I'd be interested in seeing the separate losses for the two networks.
>> UPN never developed a hit show that didn't have the name "Star Trek"
>> attached to it (and even Enterprise didn't do all that well). WB,
>> meanwhile, had Dawson's Creek, Gilmore Girls, Buffy, Smallville,
>> Angel.

>--- Ratings-wise, they were both heading into the netherworld abyss of
>no-network land. At the end of the 1999-2000 season, UPN had a 2.7
>average, WB a 2.6.

>What really gets me is why CBS just spent $1.8 billion to
>buy the web site Cnet, which beats me what they hope to get out of it,
>when it could've plowed that money into new and better programming for
>both CBS and CW.

> At its upfront presentation this week,
> the CW redefined its target audience as exclusively 18- to 34-year-old
> women.

> Fromhttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB121089546043097065.html?mod=2_1567_to...
>
> It's No Gossip, Ratings Slip Threatens CW Network
> By REBECCA DANA
> May 16, 2008; Page B1
>
> Time may be running out for the CW network.
>
> Two years after CBS Corp. and Time Warner Inc. combined their second-
> tier networks UPN and WB into the youth-oriented CW to pool young
> viewers prized by advertisers, the network's hopes of surviving are
> looking increasingly bleak.
>
> Despite the buzz about "Gossip Girl," a prime-time soap opera about a
> group of rich kids on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, the network
> has lost about 28%% of its target audience of 18 to 34 year olds so far
> this season. Its ratings during this month's "sweeps" period -- the
> all-important measure upon which future advertising rates are set --
> are down about 22%%. ...

>Then what does this say about MyNetwork TV. Just END the whole thing
>and revert all stations back to locals. WSBK's trying (http://
>tv38.com/). Perhaps a 2nd run of 'Seinfeld' or 'Wheel Of Fortune' or
>'Dr. Phil' will pull in more of an audience. This theory hasn't ever
>been tried, other than the rare, rare indy local. Network primetime is
>different than it was in 1998 when 'Seinfeld' went off the air. Maybe
>local primetime is, too. It'll NEVER be the way it was back when you
>had PTEN programming (pre-The WB/UPN).

> Univision, gets around 4 million viewers a night. 4 million viewers.
> The WB and UPN would have *killed* to get those numbers.