WB, UPN hunt for lost men
WB, UPN in doldrums
Nov 21, 2003
On the WB Network this season, "Tarzan" featured the blond ape-man chasing down bad guys in the big city -- barefoot, of course. But he never quite cracked the mystery that continues to bedevil the WB, that of the disappearing young man.
While the apparent defection of young male viewers from broadcast TV this season worries executives at every network, the trend has been especially brutal on the WB and its rival UPN, both of which have lower median ages and target a younger demographic than ABC, CBS or NBC. As a result, both the WB and UPN have lost more than one-fifth of their core 18-34 audience so far this fall, with the Time Warner-owned WB plunging 24% compared with the same period last year, according to Nielsen Media Research. By comparison, ABC, CBS and NBC are down 5%-12% in their key 18-49 demo; Fox is up 11%, mainly because of unusually strong postseason baseball this year.
The problem is bad enough that the WB and UPN executives are now joining their larger counterparts in blaming ratings service Nielsen for what they say are faulty statistics that make the audience erosion appear worse than it actually is. Both networks said they are continuing discussions with Nielsen about discrepancies in the research. (Nielsen is owned by VNU, parent company of The Hollywood Reporter.)
"It's a bit confusing," said WB co-CEO Jordan Levin, who argues that strong results for the network in the top 25 TV markets contradict the downbeat trends shown by Nielsen's national sample. "We're trying to figure out all these numbers."
David Poltrack, research chief at CBS and UPN, said that Nielsen may be inaccurately counting some men in the 18-34 category, like those whose viewing habits at college are not measured. "I think that in the case of UPN and the WB, they are getting hit harder on the male side," Poltrack said.
Not surprisingly, these arguments are getting a skeptical hearing in the advertising community, which can use the ratings declines to drive lower rates -- or at least stem increases -- at spring's upfront buying season. Media buyers said the networks have simply done a poor job creating shows that appeal to young men. Indeed, "Tarzan" has already ceased production, and such freshman series as the WB comedy "All About the Andersons" and UPN's drama "Jake 2.0" have failed to do much business.
"What's going on with young men is a programming issue more than anything else," said Steve Sternberg, senior vp at Magna Global USA in New York. Sternberg points out that both the WB and UPN have loaded up on female-skewing comedies and not generated any breakout freshman hits this season. Young women also seem to be fleeing the networks, he said, though networks and the media have paid little attention to the issue. Besides, he said, the ratings issue is a red herring: "I don't hear anyone saying, 'What's going on with the Nielsen ratings?' when UPN goes from a 1.6 to a 1.9."
John Rash of Minneapolis ad firm Campbell Mithun said that the WB in particular tried too hard this season to copy past successes. " 'Tarzan' was derivative of 'Smallville,' just as 'One Tree Hill' was of 'Dawson's Creek,' " he added.
Whatever the cause, the ratings are bad enough to crimp profits at the WB and add to the gush of red ink at Viacom-owned UPN, which has never turned an annual profit and has in the past lost an estimated $100 million a year, though network officials said that combining many operations with CBS in early 2002 has improved the balance sheet by reducing costs.
WB executives admitted that they will be forced to offer advertisers make-good spots for failing to meet overall ratings guarantees this season but emphasized that the sales department withheld more than enough inventory for such a purpose. Sources said the network, which logged a small annual profit for the first time last year, expects to earn about $10 million for fiscal 2003, a smaller sum than executives expected earlier this year. The WB collected about $775 million in the ad upfront this year, while UPN grossed an estimated $225 million, sources said.
The ratings issue is "not going to push us back to being an unprofitable network, but it's certainly impacting the degree to which we're profitable," Levin said.
Kagan World Media estimates that in EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes and depreciation) terms, UPN will lose $27 million for 2003, compared with a $65 million loss the previous year. The WB will log $70 million in EBITDA for 2003, up from $40 million last year, according to Kagan.
Network executives have been caught off-guard by the severity of the ratings slide. The WB picked "Tarzan" as this year's signature drama, shelling out an estimated $4 million for an elaborate ad campaign, including hard-to-miss billboards of star Travis Fimmel, a pouty male model, in Times Square and other key urban locations. The outlay was similar to what the network spent promoting the past debuts of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," "Felicity," "Dawson's Creek," "Smallville" and "Everwood," all of which became hits.
So WB executives were stunned when the Oct. 5 "Tarzan" premiere swung right into a tree. The program earned a 2.2 rating/6 share in 18-34, far below the premiere figures for "Felicity" (3.3/10) and "Smallville" (4.6/12).
Sources said that postpremiere, the network's top managers were somewhat divided over the show's potential. WB co-chairman Garth Ancier was very disappointed by the poor debut numbers, but Levin favored giving "Tarzan" plenty of time to rope an audience.
The latter position was supported by some big-market affiliates, who reported that "Tarzan" was doing far better on their stations than the national ratings would suggest. "In Dallas, it was a big hit," said Joe Young, vp and general manager at KDAF-TV in Dallas and regional vp at Tribune Broadcasting, which partners with Time Warner in the WB. "Was Travis Fimmel a great actor? No. But he was serviceable enough for the show, and it had great production values. I thought 'Tarzan' had all the elements."
In the end, the decision came down to money. Levin said as more episodes aired, "Tarzan's" national ratings were simply too low to justify the show's license fee to Warner Bros. Television, estimated at $1.1 million per episode (shot in Canada, the show cost slightly less than $2 million per episode to produce, sources said). A total of eight episodes were produced.
" 'Tarzan' wasn't a disaster, but with a high-concept show like that, you've got to see something really pop or it's a sign (viewers are) just not buying into the concept," Levin said.
The WB and UPN are now hoping that the worst is behind them. UPN is pointing to the continued strength of its Monday comedy lineup as well as renewed ratings vigor for Thursday's "WWE SmackDown!" The WB, meanwhile, earlier this week announced an overhaul of its struggling Thursday and Friday schedules, which executives hope will deliver better results for "Andersons" as well as the sophomore sitcom "What I Like About You."
Yet the mysterious disappearance of young viewers this season has all network executives rattled and uncertain of the future. When asked about the ratings woes afflicting the WB this season, one exec at a Big Four network barked, "Welcome to the club."
While the apparent defection of young male viewers from broadcast TV this season worries executives at every network, the trend has been especially brutal on the WB and its rival UPN, both of which have lower median ages and target a younger demographic than ABC, CBS or NBC. As a result, both the WB and UPN have lost more than one-fifth of their core 18-34 audience so far this fall, with the Time Warner-owned WB plunging 24% compared with the same period last year, according to Nielsen Media Research. By comparison, ABC, CBS and NBC are down 5%-12% in their key 18-49 demo; Fox is up 11%, mainly because of unusually strong postseason baseball this year.
The problem is bad enough that the WB and UPN executives are now joining their larger counterparts in blaming ratings service Nielsen for what they say are faulty statistics that make the audience erosion appear worse than it actually is. Both networks said they are continuing discussions with Nielsen about discrepancies in the research. (Nielsen is owned by VNU, parent company of The Hollywood Reporter.)
"It's a bit confusing," said WB co-CEO Jordan Levin, who argues that strong results for the network in the top 25 TV markets contradict the downbeat trends shown by Nielsen's national sample. "We're trying to figure out all these numbers."
David Poltrack, research chief at CBS and UPN, said that Nielsen may be inaccurately counting some men in the 18-34 category, like those whose viewing habits at college are not measured. "I think that in the case of UPN and the WB, they are getting hit harder on the male side," Poltrack said.
Not surprisingly, these arguments are getting a skeptical hearing in the advertising community, which can use the ratings declines to drive lower rates -- or at least stem increases -- at spring's upfront buying season. Media buyers said the networks have simply done a poor job creating shows that appeal to young men. Indeed, "Tarzan" has already ceased production, and such freshman series as the WB comedy "All About the Andersons" and UPN's drama "Jake 2.0" have failed to do much business.
"What's going on with young men is a programming issue more than anything else," said Steve Sternberg, senior vp at Magna Global USA in New York. Sternberg points out that both the WB and UPN have loaded up on female-skewing comedies and not generated any breakout freshman hits this season. Young women also seem to be fleeing the networks, he said, though networks and the media have paid little attention to the issue. Besides, he said, the ratings issue is a red herring: "I don't hear anyone saying, 'What's going on with the Nielsen ratings?' when UPN goes from a 1.6 to a 1.9."
John Rash of Minneapolis ad firm Campbell Mithun said that the WB in particular tried too hard this season to copy past successes. " 'Tarzan' was derivative of 'Smallville,' just as 'One Tree Hill' was of 'Dawson's Creek,' " he added.
Whatever the cause, the ratings are bad enough to crimp profits at the WB and add to the gush of red ink at Viacom-owned UPN, which has never turned an annual profit and has in the past lost an estimated $100 million a year, though network officials said that combining many operations with CBS in early 2002 has improved the balance sheet by reducing costs.
WB executives admitted that they will be forced to offer advertisers make-good spots for failing to meet overall ratings guarantees this season but emphasized that the sales department withheld more than enough inventory for such a purpose. Sources said the network, which logged a small annual profit for the first time last year, expects to earn about $10 million for fiscal 2003, a smaller sum than executives expected earlier this year. The WB collected about $775 million in the ad upfront this year, while UPN grossed an estimated $225 million, sources said.
The ratings issue is "not going to push us back to being an unprofitable network, but it's certainly impacting the degree to which we're profitable," Levin said.
Kagan World Media estimates that in EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes and depreciation) terms, UPN will lose $27 million for 2003, compared with a $65 million loss the previous year. The WB will log $70 million in EBITDA for 2003, up from $40 million last year, according to Kagan.
Network executives have been caught off-guard by the severity of the ratings slide. The WB picked "Tarzan" as this year's signature drama, shelling out an estimated $4 million for an elaborate ad campaign, including hard-to-miss billboards of star Travis Fimmel, a pouty male model, in Times Square and other key urban locations. The outlay was similar to what the network spent promoting the past debuts of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," "Felicity," "Dawson's Creek," "Smallville" and "Everwood," all of which became hits.
So WB executives were stunned when the Oct. 5 "Tarzan" premiere swung right into a tree. The program earned a 2.2 rating/6 share in 18-34, far below the premiere figures for "Felicity" (3.3/10) and "Smallville" (4.6/12).
Sources said that postpremiere, the network's top managers were somewhat divided over the show's potential. WB co-chairman Garth Ancier was very disappointed by the poor debut numbers, but Levin favored giving "Tarzan" plenty of time to rope an audience.
The latter position was supported by some big-market affiliates, who reported that "Tarzan" was doing far better on their stations than the national ratings would suggest. "In Dallas, it was a big hit," said Joe Young, vp and general manager at KDAF-TV in Dallas and regional vp at Tribune Broadcasting, which partners with Time Warner in the WB. "Was Travis Fimmel a great actor? No. But he was serviceable enough for the show, and it had great production values. I thought 'Tarzan' had all the elements."
In the end, the decision came down to money. Levin said as more episodes aired, "Tarzan's" national ratings were simply too low to justify the show's license fee to Warner Bros. Television, estimated at $1.1 million per episode (shot in Canada, the show cost slightly less than $2 million per episode to produce, sources said). A total of eight episodes were produced.
" 'Tarzan' wasn't a disaster, but with a high-concept show like that, you've got to see something really pop or it's a sign (viewers are) just not buying into the concept," Levin said.
The WB and UPN are now hoping that the worst is behind them. UPN is pointing to the continued strength of its Monday comedy lineup as well as renewed ratings vigor for Thursday's "WWE SmackDown!" The WB, meanwhile, earlier this week announced an overhaul of its struggling Thursday and Friday schedules, which executives hope will deliver better results for "Andersons" as well as the sophomore sitcom "What I Like About You."
Yet the mysterious disappearance of young viewers this season has all network executives rattled and uncertain of the future. When asked about the ratings woes afflicting the WB this season, one exec at a Big Four network barked, "Welcome to the club."
Share on LinkedIn
