Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Khaza-R]

It is a 3.8/10 at best.

Tbh, I found it difficult to rate as whole. It reminded me a bit of Book of Boba Fett in that the quality of each episode really kind waivered dramatically. I'd say at its worst it was a 3.5/10 and at its best maybe a 6/10.

I'm hoping they improve it next season. Amazon has sunk so much money into the show they don't really have a choice at this point. From what I understand of some of the metrics there was a severe drop off in viewership after the premiere. So they should be amply motivated to make improvements for the second installment.

[KateReed23]

I didn't like Lord of the Rings. I got to the last episodes but did not begin to watch them. The heroes of the franchise are very abusive, their relationship is built on lies and manipulation. There is no more fairy tale left and it's sad :/

[Fabinas]

Trival. To just have the rights of production and distribution, they have already made that back.

- - - Updated - - -

Self reportable is meaningless. The industry market analysis decides what is successful. What any distro has to say about that is irrelevant.

Rings of Power is successful. It was one of only two streaming shows in the top 15 for the year that was not owned and distributed by Netflix. Amazon has nothing to do with that reportage.

That's not what the industry cares about or uses as a means for streaming show viability. Total minutes viewed is the standard. Those numbers are publicly available.

Even if Amazon for whatever reason want to publish their viewership- it would still not mean anything because Rings of Power is still a only available in the US as a streaming show.

When you see reportage from HBO/Warner or NBC/Uni of viewership it is because their content airs on non-streaming platforms as well. Which qualifies as both original and acquired programming in some cases. These are a totally different set of market criteria for media than streaming.

So it is meaningful and useful to the market to report The Last of Us has 6 million viewers. But would not be appropriate for Stranger Things or Rings of Power. In fact, it would be laughable and seen negatively to report such of the former.

There is a case for P18-49 and possibly P2-/+. But streaming is not divided by quarters or quad demos so it's kinda useless in the industry.

Are the "total minutes viewed" reported by an independent and objective source?

Not trolling, nor dismissing what you said. Genuinely curious how is that counted and reported for any streaming show in US.

[Dhrizzle]

I want to know what world people are living in where business execs are saying "this thing failed and is a waste of money but we're going to lie and keep wasting more money because we hate profits."

Also how do we get those execs to work at EA? I want Anthem 2 and a new SimCity.

[Fencers]

Are the "total minutes viewed" reported by an independent and objective source?

Not trolling, nor dismissing what you said. Genuinely curious how is that counted and reported for any streaming show in US.

Yes. Nielsen, Titvian, Schlesinger, FPG, and other media market analytics are by necessity independent.

That is what makes them valuable and why self-reportage is not a thing within the industry. When a distro self-reports, that is advertising.

When an analytics firm reports or provides DMA/AMOL reportage that is factual and must be so. If a distro claimed they could reach engagement at X or Y level and they sell rights, ad time, or platform on false information they made up- they will be sued and their stock would tank.

It's not a thing really. To the layman, they might think it is so but it's only because you can't tell advertising apart from the analytics. The latter is usually quite expensive to acquire outside of things like Showbuzz or Nielsen.

Studios will not pay millions, and they do pay millions, for what is called 'nationals' and 'dailies' if the information was biased. It's in everyone's best interest to know what the actual numbers on engagement are to leverage your product or platform for the best result. Advertisers and companies that buy ad time as well as licensees do not appreciate being misled on the viability of the product either.

- - - Updated - - -

Also how do we get those execs to work at EA? I want Anthem 2.

Justice for Titanfall!

[Fabinas]

Yes. Nielsen, Titvian, Schlesinger, FPG, and other media market analytics are by necessity independent.

That is what makes them valuable and why self-reportage is not a thing within the industry. When a distro self-reports, that is advertising.

When an analytics firm reports or provides DMA/AMOL reportage that is factual and must be so. If a distro claimed they could reach engagement at X or Y level and they sell rights, ad time, or platform on false information they made up- they will be sued and their stock would tank.

It's not a thing really. To the layman, they might think it is so but it's only because you can't tell advertising apart from the analytics. The latter is usually quite expensive to acquire outside of things like Showbuzz or Nielsen.

Studios will not pay millions, and they do pay millions, for what is called 'nationals' and 'dailies' if the information was biased. It's in everyone's best interest to know what the actual numbers on engagement are to leverage your product or platform for the best result. Advertisers and companies that buy ad time as well as licensees do not appreciate being misled on the viability of the product either.

- - - Updated - - -

Justice for Titanfall!

So, i suppose all those companies (or at least one of them) have software or hardware installed in the streaming companies (or any other technology, really doesn't matter) to measure the minutes viewed. Am i correct or am i missing something?

Is there any graph or table that actually shows the minutes viewed per week for each episode and total? Googling around hasn't given me the full story, just various articles claiming that viewership was dwindling 1% each week till the middle of the show.

[Fencers]

So, i suppose all those companies (or at least one of them) have software or hardware installed in the streaming companies (or any other technology, really doesn't matter) to measure the minutes viewed. Am i correct or am i missing something?

Yes. They use proprietary programs called metering software that tracks and records consumer data of various demographics per market. This is often called 'macro viewer data'.

There is also (about a week out from the air date) consumer data collection; CLTs (onsite & offsite), Focus (Group & 1:1), Survey (T3B & Articulation) & Observation data that companies can pay to acquire. This part is my job.

Is there any graph or table that actually shows the minutes viewed per week for each episode and total?

Nielsen and Showbuzz publish to the public. For the others you have to pay for the data or submit either proposal or petition for a job offer.

A 'job' is what the data collection is called.

Proposals are the criteria of data collection a client may be looking for; "Tell me what % of HH watching are >$50k gross income within the 18-49 bracket".

Googling around hasn't given me the full story, just various articles claiming that viewership was dwindling 1% each week till the middle of the show.

Viewership is pointless. It's advertising. Like reporting worldwide gross for a movie box office- only domestic BO matters.

[Fabinas]

Yes. They use proprietary programs called metering software that tracks and records consumer data of various demographics per market. This is often called 'macro viewer data'.

There is also (about a week out from the air date) consumer data collection; CLTs (onsite & offsite), Focus (Group & 1:1), Survey (T3B & Articulation) & Observation data that companies can pay to acquire. This part is my job.

Nielsen and Showbuzz publish to the public. For the others you have to pay for the data or submit either proposal or petition for a job offer.

A 'job' is what the data collection is called.

Proposals are the criteria of data collection a client may be looking for; "Tell me what % of HH watching are >$50k gross income within the 18-49 bracket".

Viewership is pointless. It's advertising. Like reporting worldwide gross for a movie box office- only domestic BO matters.

Regarding the articles about "viewership", those actually reported that minutes watched were dwindling 1% each week. For example : Viewership for The Rings of Power shrank with every new episode

[Fencers]

Regarding the articles about "viewership", those actually reported that minutes watched were dwindling 1% each week. For example : Viewership for The Rings of Power shrank with every new episode

That's fine. But viewership is referencing the total # of viewers. Minutes and engagement are not the data you would get by requesting viewership numbers.

They still finished top 15 with this show. Only The Boys and Rings of Power cracked Netflix's streaming dominance.

[rogoth]

Regarding the articles about "viewership", those actually reported that minutes watched were dwindling 1% each week. For example : Viewership for The Rings of Power shrank with every new episode

at the time the show ended, there was less people watching the final episode, than had left the show after the first episode release, meaning it had lost more viewers than were left to watch the conclusion, there wasn't even a meaningful bump in viewers for the finale which means people were so pissed off and generally disinterested in the show they didn't even bother coming back to see what the final episode was all about.

if this doesn't illustrate how bad of a production this shitshow was and still is, i don't know what will, you could literally write a media studies textbook for university students based on this show of how NOT to do something, it's littered with examples both micro and macro on abject failure, and yet there are still people to this day defending the indefensible because they have a sunk cost fallacy, and so entrenched in the woke propaganda they have drunk the kool-aid they are trying to peddle.

- - - Updated - - -

That's fine. But viewership is referencing the total # of viewers. Minutes and engagement are not the data you would get by requesting viewership numbers.

They still finished top 15 with this show. Only The Boys and Rings of Power cracked Netflix's streaming dominance.

not only did the viewership numbers tank over the course of time the show was still releasing episodes, but less than 1% of people who watched ANY episode, went back to re-watch it, meaning that it was done like a kipper the moment no new episodes released, it's an abject failure of a project and is a perfect example of why you don't change a well established and beloved IP to suit 'modern' identity politics and ticking of boxes on a casting sheet.

[Fencers]

it's an abject failure of a project.

Maybe to you. But not for Amazon.

[Triceron]

Well, there's another silver lining for this series having been made. It looks like Lego is revisiting their Lord of the Rings liscense, which they haven't really touched much on in about 10 years now. Rings of Power even gets name dropped in one of their statements, even though they don't seem to be making anything specific to the show yet.

A $500 Rivendell set is set to launch next month, and leaks came out today that look pretty impressive. I don't think they would have revisited the liscense if not for the show.

[Nuadu]

so entrenched in the woke propaganda they have drunk the kool-aid they are trying to peddle.

More people using the "woke" word without knowing at all what it means or how to define it. Some people don't even try to hide it anymore.

[Syegfryed]

Self reportable is meaningless. The industry market analysis decides what is successful. What any distro has to say about that is irrelevant.

Rings of Power is successful. It was one of only two streaming shows in the top 15 for the year that was not owned and distributed by Netflix. Amazon has nothing to do with that reportage. .

And how they analyze all that shit?

Because people engagement online was shit, after it aired, no one talked about the show unless it was to shit on it, it didn't won any awards, it was not even nominated from most of then,. they said time and time again that it needed to be a huge hit like game of thrones, and we got this, how it was a success?

I guess, is, what is considered a success? if they made the money back of season 1 is considered a success?

[rhorle]

at the time the show ended, there was less people watching the final episode, than had left the show after the first episode release,

The show saw an increase in minutes viewed and the finale episode was close to the opening week. So was it "less" but only by 98 minutes acording to the Nielsen numbers. Episodes 1 and 2 were 1,235m minutes. Episode 8 was 1,137m minutes. The low point for the show was episode 6 at 966m minutes. Episodes 4 and 5 declined by about 10m minutes each week. That isn't an abject failure.

[Syegfryed]

I was expecting more when you said "the top 15", but they are just the 15th place, that was a bit sad. And that is like, almost all the shows that aired, of course they would make to it somehow lol

[rhorle]

Once your chips are in the middle, it can be hard to walk away.

Is that why the haters keep on hating instead of walking away?

[Lorgar Aurelian]

God I love this thread.

Some one who apparently works directly in this line of work “numbers across multiple unbiased sources says it did well and was with there investment”

People who whine about how it did poorly “I don’t like it so your wrong and it failed!”

[Syegfryed]

Tbh, I found it difficult to rate as whole. It reminded me a bit of Book of Boba Fett in that the quality of each episode really kind waivered dramatically. I'd say at its worst it was a 3.5/10 and at its best maybe a 6/10.

I don't think its that difficult, because it was rly bad.

If we put all the good things in one basket, you have like 5 people acting that was decent, CGI and music, even if you give one point for acting, music, and CGI, they would get only a 3/10.

The rest is just bad in a objective e standpoint, writing, dialogues, editing the scenes, the rest of the acting, the cast that didn't fit the characters, pacing problems, bad choreography in all fights, is full of nonsense like cutting a rope that destroy a tower and sociopath hobbits.

I mean, we already talked a lot about the show flaws, but you get the idea of why it gets less than a 4 overall.

I'm hoping they improve it next season. Amazon has sunk so much money into the show they don't really have a choice at this point. From what I understand of some of the metrics there was a severe drop off in viewership after the premiere. So they should be amply motivated to make improvements for the second installment.

They will change, if it will improve is yet to be seen, they got someone who did witcher and wheel of time, so i don't put hopes high. Its gonna be a hell of a work to take the scraps of season 1 and do a season 2, especially when the timeline is fucked.

[callipygoustp]

Numbers don't lie.