So far, Survivor: 1, Friends: 0.

In article , [email] wrote:

SAY IT ISN'T SO!

I'm not surprised that Survivor won out.. *I* was watching Friends!

(and taping Survivor) :)

"Tika Waylan-Majere" wrote in message news:95f1q3$g86$[email]...

In article , Tika Waylan-Majere wrote:

It isn't so.

Tennant

In article ,

True, but the ratings last night have been consistent with Friends' ratings this season. I don't think there's any alarm for concern. And besides, S2 beat a show that's been around for 7 seasons. Do you really call it a huge victory for S2? Let's see if Survivor 2 will keep it up for that long. Look at Who wants to be a millionaire. It's already starting to dwindle after 2 seasons.

Friends has consistently maintained its viewership for 7 seasons and stayed in the top 5. Hmm...since when is that considered to be a sign that the show is falling? -- Isn't that just kick- you-in-the-crotch, spit-on-your-neck fantastic? -Rachel "TOW Ross' New Girlfriend"

In article , [email] wrote:

Exactly. The marginal ratings difference reported by others does not constitute "soundly defeated". And don't forget that you can add on to those Friends ratings the huge number of viewers in the rest of the developed world, which Survivor will not get. Then add on top of that the revenue from sales of tapes & DVDs.

Let's *assume* that Survivor is an excellent programme, attracting a great many viewers, some of whom are the majority of the audience for Friends. Survivor ratings soar & Friends ratings plummet. That would be severe grounds for concern, but it would *not* be a sign that the sitcom had got any worse, or less funny, would it?

Tennant