Will Meteor Or Bad Ratings Wipe Out 'Terra Nova'?
Fox is waiting until after the holidays to make a decision
"Terra Nova" was supposed to be the "X Factor" of the fall season, which was supposed to be the "American Idol" of the fall season. Apparently, the chain broke somewhere.
After 10 episodes and just a couple more to go, Steven Spielberg's big budget dinosaur adventure could be coming to an end. Not that the ratings are terrible -- but even with a strong audience for Fox, it may not be pulling in strong enough numbers to pay for itself.
That could mean a quick 12-and-out life for "Terra Nova." The only saving grace for fans of the show: Fox says it won't make a decision until after the holidays.
But don't tell the actors that "Terra Nova" is facing extinction. Jason O'Mara, the star of "Terra Nova" as Jim Shannon, told Twitter followers this week that a decision had been "deferred to New Year" by Fox. He added that "everyone involved remains confident and optimistic."
Shelley Conn, who play's O'Mara's on-screen wife, told Digital Spy that the cast and crew are "so invested that it would break my heart if we didn't get another chance at this. I just think everybody's worked so hard and we've created something that deserves to be continued."
But it's not that Fox hasn't recognized that. A decision on whether to keep the show going is pure business. The pilot, according to the Los Angeles Times cost $15 million to make, and subsequent episodes are costing well into the high millions, making it one of the most expensive shows on television.
Despite that investment, however, "Terra Nova" premiered to a 5.6 rating/8 share on Sept. 26, according to Fast National overnight ratings from The Nielsen Co. While it did climb nearly 13 percent to a 6.3/9 on Oct. 10, it has since averaged a 4.3/6, an audience loss of 32 percent from that high.
Not only is "Terra Nova" far lower than network expectations, it's even behind on what Fox did with the timeslot last year -- as much as 14 percent.
Through the end of November, it remains Fox's third highest-rated show behind "The X Factor" and "Bones." It's tied with "New Girl" and slightly ahead of "Glee" and "House," and maintains a No. 39 overall ranking. Yet, it's achieving numbers picked up by shows that cost a fraction of the price.
A saving grace for "Terra Nova" might be found in both international and DVD sales. The series is an in-house production for Fox, so it would collect on any future revenue generated by alternate forms of distribution. If there are enough projected sales to justify possibly a reduced per-episode cost, Fox could try to move forward with a second season, and see how that shapes up.
"Terra Nova" has a pair of episodes remaining this season before it's replaced by another genre show, this time by J.J. Abrams called "Alcatraz." How that series fares could also play a part in any decision the network makes about the fate of "Terra Nova."
For now, "Terra Nova" airs Mondays at 8 p.m. ET on Fox.
About the Author
by rickaysen | Fri, 12/09/2011 - 12:14 #1
The show is sometimes interesting, sometimes not so much. I have a problem with the premise in that if the human race got to choose a point in earths history to start over, why pick one inhabited by carnivorous predators and inevitably destined to be wiped out by a planet killing meteor strike. Wouldn't they simply pick a point a little later...I mean the environment was pretty darn clean up until just a hundred years ago.
by charlituna | Fri, 12/09/2011 - 12:39 #2
The real issue here is simple.
25k.
That's the number of folks whose opinions make up the ratings. Out of 380 Million people in the US according to the last census. Even when you add in the 100k more folks for sweeps, that's still an obscenely low cut of the population. ANd networks don't give credit to shows for hulu, network sites, iTunes, Amazon. Right now the last ep of Terra Nova is number 54 on the iTunes list but when you consider 3 days of other shows having aired a new ep and that most downloads are the next day, that's perhaps not so bad. Overall there could have been a few thousand downloads. But none of that is counted towards the budget.
Just that 25k people. Which comes out to like 1/1000th of a percent. And means that a single viewer can make or break a show.
by mhinman | Sat, 12/10/2011 - 15:29 #3
Charlituna ... sorry, but I can't buy that argument.
Look at Presidential polls the day before the race. Tell me how many times the final results end up very close to the margin of error.
That's grabbing the opinion of 300 million people (Ok, maybe 80 million voters). But do you know how many people they use for those polls? Just a few hundred.
So if they can determine the outcome of the Presidential race, why couldn't 25,000 determine what people are watching on TV?
There is also a REASON why you don't see direct credit given to Hulu, network sites, etc. Think about it ... who pays for the show? Ads. And the ads aired during the actual broadcast, without time-shifting, is still the top way networks get money for the shows they air. Even with ads on Hulu, the revenue there is not significant. And while iTunes and Amazon might be good -- if the show is produced by another company, that COMPANY gets the proceeds, not the network.
Remember, ratings are about the number of people watching ADS, not the show itself. And the reason for that is because advertisers are paying money based on the number of people who will see their ad. Why would they want to pay for people who don't see their ad? Doesn't make sense.