Harrison Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Dunno where you got those numbers but they make no sense for THAT time period, back then the viewers were much much higher and the ratings are what i'm talking about, and the show was number two in it's last season, topped only by the Andy Griffith show. Which has always been a pet peeve of mine, why are the Hillbillies, Griffith and Lucy taking so long to come out on dvd when they were three of the top shows of the sixties? I provided the source with a link with those numbers. You are right, The Lucy Show was the second most popular TV series on air during the 1967-1968 season. Out of the six seasons, it did the best in attracting the most viewers. The next season of this series that did the best in attracting viewers was the classic first season. All of the The Andy Griffith Show has been out on DVD for quite some time now. I want to say since 2007. That's almost five years. As for The Beverly Hillbillies (and its sister show, Green Acres), I guess neither series have done well enough on DVD to warrant another season. As for The Lucy Show, it took so long for it to come out because it is a follow-up show and the one to the classic I Love Lucy. Obviously, they wanted all of I Love Lucy and The Lucy-Desi Comedy Hour to be completed on DVD before working on the 60s series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrison Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 I am not going by YOUR audience numbers because they are not right, try the Neilsen ratings which were the ones that mattered at that time, and the order goes by rankings so it's 6 4 5 1 2 and 3. Those were the Neilsen ratings. Anyways, just because the later seasons ranked higher doesn't mean they had more viewers (higher ratings) than the earlier seasons. As I said earlier, the entire series was consistent in more or less attracting the same margin of viewers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrison Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Watched these today: "The Loophole in the Lease" "Lucy and the Ring-a-Ding Ring" (re-watch) "Lucy and George Burns" (re-watch) "Lucy's College Reunion" "Lucy and Paul Winchell" (re-watch) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Those were the Neilsen ratings. Anyways, just because the later seasons ranked higher doesn't mean they had more viewers (higher ratings) than the earlier seasons. As I said earlier, the entire series was consistent in more or less attracting the same margin of viewers. YOUR AUDIENCE NUMBERS ARE WRONG! The audience wasn't so fragmented back then, there were only THREE networks, those numbers are relevent to today's shows, not the ones back in the sixties. Never seen any mistakes in data provided anywhere on the net? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Those were the Neilsen ratings. Anyways, just because the later seasons ranked higher doesn't mean they had more viewers (higher ratings) than the earlier seasons. As I said earlier, the entire series was consistent in more or less attracting the same margin of viewers. Please refer to Neilsen numbers in any book, they never gave the audience in millions back then, they only ranked the shows by number one to whatever number of shows were on in any given week. Nowadays, a 30 Rock gets a few million people watching, and the 50th anniversary special got repeated often and got 20 million, but the numbers back then were much much higher. AS I SAID BEFORE, THERE WERE ONLY T H R E E NETWORKS! And everybody watched television and everybody watched Lucy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeySanJoaquin Posted December 8, 2011 Report Share Posted December 8, 2011 Maybe those ratings numbers are for the lauded 18-49 demographic? Dunno as I didn't think they tracked those back in the day like they do now but Claude's right, there's no way those numbers are Nielsen ratings reflecting in MILLIONS how many peopled watched Lucy weekly because back then it was probably easily 30 - 35 or more million people a week as opposed to today's much more splintered 10 or so million viewers for a Top 10 "hit" show. Something's amiss! Now the rankings look okay, we all know she always landed somewhere in the Top 10 (later, with HL in the Top 20) each week, with rare exception well that is until the HL days, and we need not even bring up LWL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Maybe those ratings numbers are for the lauded 18-49 demographic? Dunno as I didn't think they tracked those back in the day like they do now but Claude's right, there's no way those numbers are Nielsen ratings reflecting in MILLIONS how many peopled watched Lucy weekly because back then it was probably easily 30 - 35 or more million people a week as opposed to today's much more splintered 10 or so million viewers for a Top 10 "hit" show. Something's amiss! Now the rankings look okay, we all know she always landed somewhere in the Top 10 (later, with HL in the Top 20) each week, with rare exception well that is until the HL days, and we need not even bring up LWL! Thanks for backing me up Joey, i was going nuts when i saw those figures of 14 million only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrison Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 FROM: "The Complete Directory to Prime Time Network TV Shows." "The Lucy Show" 1st Season, 1962-63: Rating, 29.8 2nd Season, 1963-64: Rating, 28.1 3rd Season, 1964-65: Rating, 26.6 4th Season, 1965-66: Rating, 27.7 5th Season, 1966-67: Rating, 26.2 6th Season, 1967-68: Rating, 27.0 According to this, the first and second seasons were the ones that drew the highest ratings for the show. And that just proves my point ... the seasons that were the most popular for their year doesn't mean they were the highest-rated for the series. Now you see, that's what i want to hear, i've always said that four five and six were better than one two and three, that was reflected in the ratings too. Nope. It went like this: 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 3rd, and then 5th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 FROM: "The Complete Directory to Prime Time Network TV Shows." "The Lucy Show" 1st Season, 1962-63: Rating, 29.8 2nd Season, 1963-64: Rating, 28.1 3rd Season, 1964-65: Rating, 26.6 4th Season, 1965-66: Rating, 27.7 5th Season, 1966-67: Rating, 26.2 6th Season, 1967-68: Rating, 27.0 According to this, the first and second seasons were the ones that drew the highest ratings for the show. And that just proves my point ... the seasons that were the most popular for their year doesn't mean they were the highest-rated for the series. Will you just look up the Neilsen RANKINGS, they were the ones people looked at, the ones that were the most important and the ones I quoted above. What the hell are you giving me, is 29.8 supposed to be the average rating for that season's number of shows or what????? I am talking about how her show finished each season and the last three seasons BEAT the first three, okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy??????????????????? You are raising my blood pressure needlessly, so please stop! LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Oh and i'm not sure about this one but i believe each ratings point meant one million viewers so there goes your smalllish 14 million out the window. 30 million seems about right. And makes more sense. But nobody was talking about that, we were discussing her Neilsen numbers and that is the last three beating the first three or did i say that already? LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Yes Regis, this is my final answer . . . . source, The Lucy Book, where the author stupidly refers to them as Nielson instead of Nielsen ratings for each season of The Lucy Show . . . from the first to the sixth, 5,6,8, 3,4,2I rest my case! If only she'd had one more season she'd have made it to number one again, LOL! Damn you Andy Griffith and your friggin homespun crap! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrison Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Yes Regis, this is my final answer . . . . source, The Lucy Book, where the author stupidly refers to them as Nielson instead of Nielsen ratings for each season of The Lucy Show . . . from the first to the sixth, 5,6,8, 3,4,2I rest my case! If only she'd had one more season she'd have made it to number one again, LOL! Damn you Andy Griffith and your friggin homespun crap! Those are rankings that the Lucy Book is providing NOT ratings. You and the book are correct in that the order of the rankings for each season went like this: 5,6,8,3,4, and 2. But as I said previously, just because the last three seasons ranked higher DOES NOT MEAN they rated higher than the earlier ones. Yeah, it's too bad ... if it wasn't for The Andy Griffith Show, Lucy would have had TWO shows that went out at the very top. But going out at 2nd place isn't THAT bad. I am kind of surprised both shows were at the top of the heap given they were in their later years and competing against NEW shows at the time like Family Affair, Batman, The Carol Burnett Show, Dark Shadows, Star Trek, Mission: Impossible, ect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Those are ratings. You and the book are correct! It went like this: 5,6,8,3,4, and 2. The last three seasons rated higher DOES MEAN they rated higher than the earlier ones. YES, THEY ARE R A T I N G S AS SUPPLIED BY NEILSEN, THE ONE AND ONLY EXPERTS IN THAT FIELD, LUCY WAS R A T E D THOSE NUMBERS FOR THOSE YEARS, THEREFORE RATED HIGHER IN THE YEARS SHE WAS ALONE ON THE SHOW THAN THE YEARS SHE HAD A FAMILY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 By the way, hope you don't mind, i made a few corrections in your earlier post to make them accurate, LOL! Now please drop this or i shall be forced to higher a HIT man! The way you handle FACTS makes me think maybe you work for Fox or something. LOL! Now again, that's 5 6 and 8 for the first three seasons, followed by the much higher ratings for the 4th 5th and 6th. THOSE ratings were 3rd 4th and even 2nd for the last season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrison Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 By the way, hope you don't mind, i made a few corrections in your earlier post to make them accurate, LOL! Oh, brother. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Oh, brother. lol Hey, relax, i'm only joking, well half joking, well setting the facts straight, well, not letting it go . . LOL! We Leos just hate losing an argument and i was getting help from Lucy's ghost on this, even setting up a seance and contacting her through a Neilsen Medium. 14 million viewers indeed! SHEESH! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Those are rankings that the Lucy Book is providing NOT ratings. You and the book are correct in that the order of the rankings for each season went like this: 5,6,8,3,4, and 2. But as I said previously, just because the last three seasons ranked higher DOES NOT MEAN they rated higher than the earlier ones. Yeah, it's too bad ... if it wasn't for The Andy Griffith Show, Lucy would have had TWO shows that went out at the very top. But going out at 2nd place isn't THAT bad. I am kind of surprised both shows were at the top of the heap given they were in their later years and competing against NEW shows at the time like Family Affair, Batman, The Carol Burnett Show, Dark Shadows, Star Trek, Mission: Impossible, ect. YES, THEY ARE R A T I N G S AS SUPPLIED BY NEILSEN, THE ONE AND ONLY EXPERTS IN THAT FIELD, LUCY WAS R A T E D THOSE NUMBERS FOR THOSE YEARS, THEREFORE RATED HIGHER IN THE YEARS SHE WAS ALONE ON THE SHOW THAN THE YEARS SHE HAD A FAMILY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 10, 2011 Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 Ok, now THAT's funny! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrison Posted December 15, 2011 Report Share Posted December 15, 2011 "Lucy and Pat Collins" "Lucy and the Great Bank Robbery" "Lucy, the Good Skate" "Viv Visits Lucy" "Lucy's Sister Pays a Visit" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 15, 2011 Report Share Posted December 15, 2011 "Lucy and Pat Collins" "Lucy and the Great Bank Robbery" "Lucy, the Good Skate" "Viv Visits Lucy" "Lucy's Sister Pays a Visit" And each of those got more than 14 million people watching when they played, LOL! Maybe even double that, LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeySanJoaquin Posted December 15, 2011 Report Share Posted December 15, 2011 And each of those got more than 14 million people watching when they played, LOL! Maybe even double that, LOL! Oh, you, don't start! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 15, 2011 Report Share Posted December 15, 2011 Oh, you, don't start! I was only FUNNIN with Harrison Otis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucyilove Posted December 16, 2011 Report Share Posted December 16, 2011 From season three: LUCY THE GOOD SKATE ('64) with a pleasant if unexciting leading man, Charles Drake (best known for his role in HARVEY) whom I rather like, too bad he didn't become a quasi-boyfriend for Lucy on the show. LUCY GETS AMNESIA ('64) or maybe she just wants to forget Max Showalter, a little of Max goes a looooonnnnggg way. and also from 1964, THE LUCILLE BALL COMEDY HOUR with Gale Gordon, a very under-rehearsed Bob Hope, and again, the ever appealing Max Showalter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C L A U D E Posted December 16, 2011 Report Share Posted December 16, 2011 From season three: LUCY THE GOOD SKATE ('64) with a pleasant if unexciting leading man, Charles Drake (best known for his role in HARVEY) whom I rather like, too bad he didn't become a quasi-boyfriend for Lucy on the show. LUCY GETS AMNESIA ('64) or maybe she just wants to forget Max Showalter, a little of Max goes a looooonnnnggg way. and also from 1964, THE LUCILLE BALL COMEDY HOUR with Gale Gordon, a very under-rehearsed Bob Hope, and again, the ever appealing Max Showalter. Lucy the good skate is classic Lucy and one of her all time BEST Lucy shows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucyilove Posted December 18, 2011 Report Share Posted December 18, 2011 More from season three, 1964: LUCY AND THE GREAT BANK ROBBERY - loved this one, excellent character guest stars and Lucy was a riot in her money pants. LUCY THE CAMP COOK - loved seeing always delightful Madge Blake's bit but this one was only ok; kind of weird Candy Moore seems much warmer to Aunt Viv in her goodbyes than to Mother Ball. LUCY MAKES A PINCH - Another good one with some great Vivian snaps, though making Lucy a ticket-crazy meter maid was not perhaps the wisest touch to keep audience sympathy even if it's just mentioned not seen. Don't recall seeing Lucy's psuedo-date before, I thought they had good chemistry together. Ending was exceptionally good. LUCYS GETS HER MAID - liked this but wanted to like it much more; the fabulous Kathleen Freeman was kind of wasted in a part that scarcely touched her comic gifts and Norma Varden (so good on HAZEL and in Marilyn's GENTLEMEN PREFER BLONDES) was a little too harsh as Lucy's employer although of course that's how the part was written. Trivia: one of the art club matrons was Caryl Lincoln, Barbara Stanwyck's sister-in-law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.