Just a couple points on the ratings cited...the reruns which were
being broadcast at that time (and reruns get lower numbers anyway) were
being killed by the NBA playoffs and finals, which were going on in the
same timeslot. (Actually, throughout June, everybody was getting hit to
some degree; we got it worse because we were at 8 in many markets opposite
the NBA, but it ain't that much of a difference.)

From the overnights on "Grail," we're pretty much back where we
were prior to reruns, a definite jump upward...an increase of about two
ratings points.

Cost-wise, btw, we're about the same price as "Kung Fu," so there
isn't much difference in that respect.

jms

Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com> asks:
> (The militant Trekker agitators over there are out to milk this
> one for whatever mileage they can get out of it.) While I've had
> the good sense not to get involved in their ongoing scuffle
> concerning this, I find myself wondering about one thing with
> respect to B5's ratings now that it's being shown on cable: are
> the two separate airings of the season 5 episodes tabulated
> cumulatively, or separately?

No, the ratings are added for the two showings in a week.

As for the ratings...we are TNT's second-highest rated show.
Where does it say we have to be in the top 15 of everything on cable or
it's not a success? Voyager's and DS9's ratings would put it at the
bottom of the network pile, but it's closer to the high-middles in
syndication. The only ratings figure that matters is this: have the
ratings been high enough for the show to stay on the air, and let me
tell the story that I wanted to tell? And the answer to that is yes.
And now the show is out there; nobody cares 10 years from now if it was
in the top 15, or 5, or 50...the show is the show is the show.

And those who come in from the Trek camp to badmouth B5 because
of the ratings should be reminded that the original Star Trek was
canceled in its third year because of poor ratings...and was considered
a failure by the networks and the studio. But the show was the show
was the show, and now it has grown.

As will B5.

jms

{original post had no questions}

B5 has *killer* demographics, substantially better than Lois and
Clark, which did very good demos.

But see, this is the trap...you let the other guy define the
argument for you, and the second they do that, they win the argument.
"Unless B5 does as good as ST, then it ain't worth squat." Well,
you're comparing a 5 year show against a 30 year franchise...apples and
oranges. Now, if you want to compare B5 in its 5 years against the
original ST...then B5 wins, because we're on two years after they were
CANCELED.

The fight is a dopey one on the face of it...caused by people
who want a fight between the shows, and want to define the argument
such that it makes everybody feel they have to defend something that
does not require *any* defense.

jms

{original post unavailable}

Much the opposite; for a fanatical portion of them, this is a
religious war, and the more B5 succeeds, the more they become unhinged.

jms