Hoover to ABC for canceling soaps: You suck!


Image Credit: Everett Collection; Mathew Imaging/FilmMagic.com

Hoover stood up with irate fans today by announcing that it will yank advertising from ABC in light of the net’s decision to cancel All My Children and One Life to Live. On the vacuum company’s Facebook page, vice president of marketing Brian Kirkendall said “we hear you loud and clear” and plans to discontinue advertising with ABC this Friday.

“We’re making every attempt to pull our spots from these programs sooner,” Kirkendall said. “Because we feel that’s not enough, we also want to help get your voice heard with ABC. So, we’ve set up a special email address, SaveTheSoaps@Hoover.com, to help pull together the mass emotional outpouring of support for our beloved ABC soaps and get it to our contacts at ABC. Please, send your emails to us at SaveTheSoaps@Hoover.com, and we’ll get every, single last one of them to ABC.” 

A sponsor launching a save our show campaign? That’s pretty unique (though Subway jumped on the Save Chuck bandwagon with its finale and footlong campaign). And it certainly makes for good PR, though all it will do is back up ABC’s claim that there’s no money in airing soaps. The enormous costs of maintaining old (and many think outdated) daytime sudsers was the primary reason behind the network’s decision to yank the two shows. One less advertiser will only bolster the net’s decision, though it should certainly help Hoover collect a few more friends on Facebook!

No word from ABC, for now. Meanwhile, passionate fans have not given up hope. Petition, anyone?

I knew I was right to buy a Hoover. Follow me @EWLynette

Read more:
Will a cable net rescue the canceled soaps? (Sound: crickets)
ABC daytime chief: `I never thought I’d be the guy to take two of the shows off’
Do canceled soap stars have another life to live?

Comments (308 total) Add your comment
Page: 1 2 3 11
  • The shows were getting awful ratings and not making money for the network. They have every right to cancel both shows and I’m sick of fat housewives, asocial shut ins, and old bitties complaining about the cancellation. Yes, they’ve been on forever, but what happened to the variety show? The TV miniseries? TV changes and the economics of TV are not in favor of the soap opera right now. Suck it up and move on.

    • tinybuffyfan

      Bitter and lonely, much? You must be such a joy to be around!

      • Jason

        Not as bitter and lonely as lots of the folks who watch soaps all day, instead of going outside or watching something actually worthwhile. Yes, I’m being a little obnoxious, so let me add to it: I don’t think the “much?” construction in your comment benefits from the comma. Cheers!

      • ALICIA


      • Frank

        What the hell do “loyalties” have to do with failing shows being cancelled in a business decision?

      • Zakry

        Why is it men who have so much to say about “failing shows.” Soaps weren’t made for you. And, your interpretation of who watches them is disgusting and inaccurate. In the Tivo age, plenty of folks were watching them in the evenings or over the weekends, or online.

        I do think its too bad the soap is dying, but I can’t argue with the business logic of it. They could probably put on several months of talk shows for what they pay Susan Lucci alone.

      • @Jason

        Yes, you are being obnoxious, and not just a little. People today have DVRs and can time shift their soap opera watching. Many people watch them after work or in the evening, instead of watching primetime programing. There’s also SoapNet, a cable channel that runs many of that day’s soaps in primetime. Both AMC & OLTL are shown on SoapNet.
        What’s supposed to be “worthwhile” viewing? Watching murders on all the CSIs, Criminal Minds, Law & Orders, etc.?

      • @Frank

        Loyalties have to do with the fact that soaps have loyal viewers who won’t miss an episode. The type of shows they’re putting on in place of these soaps aren’t ones that draw that kind of loyal viewers. For a lifestyle show, you can miss episodes, or turn off episodes that don’t have topics that interest you.

      • Ian

        Loyalty doesn’t make money. The soaps get almost ZERO of the demo that advertisers want. It doesn’t matter how many people watch them if none of those people are the demo that advertisers want, and that’s pretty much what was happening with soaps.

      • @Ian

        Not true. Soaps get from 25% to 40% of their viewers from the Women 18-49 range, which is who the ads on soaps are geared to.

      • Ian

        The networks want 18-34, not 18-49. Seems like a minute difference to all of us, but it’s a huge difference to advertisers. If less than half of their already small audience is 18-49, then it’s an even smaller slice than 18-34. I’ve read several trade articles about soaps just not getting the demos that pay. They may run ads that target that demo on soaps, but they get less money for it, and would rather have programming that dips more in the 18-34 range so they can make more money on it.

    • Teetee

      You’re ignorant.

      Are all football fans flabby bellied, lazy bums who lay ar

    • Teetee

      You’re ignorant.

    • chris

      Shut up u have no clue what your talking about. The shows were making money. The network is just greedy.

      • Frank

        The shows were bleeding money like crazy. If they weren’t, they wouldn’t have forced AMC to switch coasts. That didn’t help.

      • @Frank

        They were making money. It’s just that the network thinks that putting on cheaper shows will help them make more.
        It was a joke for them to make AMC move to LA. The cost alone for that move was expensive. It would have been cheaper to have moved out of Manhattan to New Jersey, and let the actors not have to move across country.

      • X

        Does it matter, the f**cking things have been on air for nearly 50 years, just sucking the life of the network, generation after generation. Some actors like Susan lucci are too lazy and too spoiled to find new jobs. They got used to milking the show, after nearly 40-50 years, you would think one would move on but no the actors and the producers enjoy just bleeding the network dry, while they tell recycled stupid stories.

    • Daisy

      How original. Thank you for your opinion and disenfranchising an entire fanbase. Aren’t you TOTALLY AWESOME, DUDE.

    • Melissa

      while the genre was created for housewives and stay at home moms it reached a whole new audience with the children and grandchildren. I have been watching ABC soaps since the mid 80s. Started watching with my grandmother, mother and aunts. We family is now in our 4th generation of soap watchers! I continued watching through high school and college and still watch daily. I have a demanding fulltime job. The 1st thing I do when I come home is turn on “my stories” (thanks Nana) and escape reality for a little while. Its a guilty pleasure that has been with me since childhood. Its sad to see it going away the way it is.

      • Marleen

        Melissa – I do the same thing for the same reason and have been watching since the mid 70s with my grandmother, mom and aunts. These are great stories (like a good book) that you can’t wait for the next page. I will not dvr the new shows. I’m a soap person who will have to support Y&R, DOOL, BB and GH to keep these going. Also OLTL could easily compete with Desperate Housewives and B&S if on in prime time.

      • Wha’ever

        Please !! Of course OLTL could not easily complete DH or Brothers & Sisters !! The expectations for prime-time series are high, at a level that soap-operas have never reached or even tried to. If they had, maybe more people (and I mean more people who are relevant to the advertisers) would like them and watch them.

    • Silv

      Gotta say the headline alone is priceless.

    • Ana

      Hey I am 19 years old and I watch one life to live and I have friends who do as well.

    • Peter

      I have zero interest in soaps, but I wonder why their existence bothers you so much?

    • Baltimore Soap Fan

      That’s an ignorant. All My Children is, along with The Wire and Deadwood, one of the best dramas I’ve ever watched.

      • ThisIstheEnd

        Okay. I don’t care if someone watches soap operas, but that is one of the stupidest remarks I have ever read.

      • Monty

        Comparing the Wire to AMC is like comparing a $50 steak to the sh!t I took this morning…

      • Kim

        I love soaps, but no. That said? If the creative teams of The Wire and Deadwood had to come up with 250 episodes every year with no break for over 40 years? They’d be about where AMC is.

      • Wha’ever

        OK. No. You just went too far.

      • Steph

        Hahahaha. That being said, I don’t care about the existence of soaps one way or another. I will say that I look down on people who watch them. I think soaps are utterly stupid; therefore, the people who watch them must follow suit. *Shrugs* Sorry.

    • April

      Really? Quite a bit of soap viewers are college students and we’re the future. You want to treat your future like that? Nice.

    • Michelle

      First of all, I’m not a fat housewife, a social shut-in, or an old bittie, as you call it. I am a hard-working court reporter. And Soaps are my entertainment when I take a break from reading transcripts. I have been watching Soaps for a very long time. Isn’t that what televsion is for, entertainment? This reality crap is just that, crap. The actors and actresses on these Soaps are very talented, and a lot of stars got their starts from Soaps. So why don’t you just get the notion out of your head that we are fat housewives, because you are so off the mark. How many shows do you know of that have the loyal fan base that these shows have? And what’s it to you anyway. Why do you care that we don’t want our Soaps canceled for no good reason. It’s just greed, pure greed. And ABC/DISNEY will feel the impact when we stop watching ABC and stop spending money on Disney. We’re the daytime viewers, we’re the ones that have kept ABC daytime going. Without us, ABC has nothing!!

      • Ian

        Without ABC Daytime viewers they have nothing??? HAHAHAHAHA!!! You’re seriously delusional Michelle. If you think ABC’s core audience was the daytime viewers, and they would cancel the thing they watch, you’re insane. They were getting terrible ratings, and terrible ad sales in their daytime programming. They’d rather get the same numbers with programs that are cheaper to produce, so why wouldn’t they?

      • Wha’ever

        Your own argument : a lot of stars got their starts from soaps – and moved on to something better. I really don’t get why people who watch soaps don’t get to acknowledge that there are equally good (I personally think WAY BETTER but I won’t argue about that) TV shows on air.

      • Jennine

        ABC sucks im so pissed that they keep cancelling all the good shows.they dont even give them a chance to get off the ground. No ordinary family was great. Off the map was great. V was getting good. Damnit ABC get it together or your ggonna totally lose all your viewers. Idiots!

    • TV Gord

      … is just telling the truth. Shoot the messenger much?

      • Ted

        Says the guy whose entire life is spent haunting entertainment websites, obsessively commenting on every story, and who – by my offhand calculation – cannot have left his chair anytime in the past five years. Can you even get out of it anymore, Gord?

      • usualsupect

        Hah! What Ted said, lol

      • Ian

        I gotta say, that if you notice him that much, you must have spent an awful lot of time doing the same thing he is. I read the comments here quite a bit (I thought(, and don’t remember ever seeing his name before, lol.

      • TV Gord

        Thanks, Ian. And Ted, unlike you, I get paid for doing this! Yes, it IS pretty sweet!

    • Robyn

      These shows were and are not getting terrible ratings. That is the crap Brian Frons is throwing against the wall and apparently you are the type of wall it stuck to. Your oversimplified description of the average soap fan demonstrates you total lack of Intellect so I will say no more on that subject. Hoover rocks in my opinion. I appreciate doing business with a company that has integrity and not just a sheep in a herd.

      • Brent

        Totally agreed. I’d wager the main reason for the cancellations is greed. Those shows weren’t losing money…it’s just the crap they’re replacing the soaps with is cheaper for them, so more $ in their pockets & who cares about the loyal fans!

      • Ian

        Actually, as someone in the radio business, I get the TV ratings for every daypart for every week courtesy of Broadcast & Cable, and the ratings were terrible for ALL soaps. They’ve slipped badly over the last decade, and most of it is lost to the cable channels. We’re past the era of having 2 choices for daytime (Soaps or game shows), and the ratings and ad-rates in daytime network TV is falling like a stone. Deal with it…

      • Ryn

        around 2,3 million viewers isnt that bad, especially for networks like ABC. Look Primetime shows gets cancelled some just after 6 or so episodes, its very rare to see primetime shows reaching more than 4 seasons these days. just be thankful ABC gave you 40 plus seasons to rewatch. its about time soap opera just die, they have been here for too long and are no longer relevant to this generation and after.

    • Amy


    • Tish

      suck up your sports or favorite shows of entertainment!!! My question is will it still come on the soap channel, on cable at night? If not Why?

      • i think

        Welll…..the Soap channel is owned by ABC/Disney. It was already determined last year that it would be discontinued shortly. There was an uproar about it- but if they pull the plug on their OWN soaps, then why would they want to show soaps from competing networks? They don’t- and now the Soap Channel goes away and makes more room for the crappy reality shows or over abundance of manufactured kid shows they seem to feel so good about producing.(Even if it creates, only to ruin some poor kids’ future or family in the process). Yep-
        Gotta love the ABC/ Disney family.

    • Gigi

      You are absolutely correct, yet no need to be sooo insulting.

    • Kim Comeau

      Your telling us we need to get a life and move on. Your on a site about soaps and spending your time commenting on it. I am 30 years old and all my friends my age and younger watch it along with my parents and grandparents I’m sure in their 90’s they should just move on to reality tv. There is no tv left for anyone who wants actors just reality. You want to watch a cooking show meets the view have fun.

    • bb

      Variety shows technically still exist. Although they are “reality” shows, Dancing with the Stars and American Idol results shows follow a variety format more than anything else. And as far as no more miniseries, don’t tell HBO. They racked up 23 Emmy nods for a little one called John Adams they pulled together in recent years.

    • Karen Barkley

      OMG, Fron’s must be posting, He feels the same way as this fool. Stupid man, stupid comment.

    • Kate

      Your assessment of the soap-viewing public is just as outdated as you say the soap genre has become. Most viewers are working women (and men!) who record the shows or watch them on the nighttime soap network. I’d be more likely to applaud the decision had ABC opted to replace them with something new or interesting — but more retreads of the horrible “View”? Celebrity and pop culture “chat” shows are simply the lowest form of “women’s entertainment.” I’d rather watch soaps any day than sit through an hour of something called “The Chew”!

      • Lisa Simpson

        I don’t watch soaps anymore (but I did when I was in college), but since it seems that they are DVR’ed a lot, the ratings may not reflect their true viewership. And advertisers may be leery of spending money on them since people tend to skip the commercials on shows they’ve DVR’ed.

      • maggie

        A lot of college students watch soaps. You can also watch many saops online. Between that and DVRs, the soap viewership is probably much greater than what the ratings reflect. The ratings system is outdated anyway.
        It’s sad that ABC is getting rid of a type of show that is unique to broadcast networks, daytime soaps, and replacing it with generic lifestyle programs that already glut cable channels.

    • Fed up in NE

      Hey moran, I love these soaps and shocker of all shockers I AM not a stay at home mom. I work 50 hours a week, but I still DVR each and every episode and I watch them every weekend after my child has gone to bed. Your comment is extremely sexist and ignorant! Kudos for Hoover for pulling their ads. What ABC is doing is so stupid on so many levels. Pulling 2 incredibly acted and written soaps off the air so they can replace them with 2 more talk shows. Seriously????? Why in gods name do we need 2 more talk shows? Bad move ABC, bad move!!!

      • Marian Webster

        You really should learn how to spell “moron” before calling someone that. You may also want to learn a bit more about proper punctuation.

      • Lesley

        Maybe you should stop watching Soaps and take an online English class.

      • EruditeSoapFan

        If you’re gonna critique “moran” then you better get to work on the guy throwing “bitties” around, too. Lack of spelling prowess is not limited to soap opera watchers.

      • Marian Webster

        Point taken, EruditeSoapFan, but that post was so bad that spelling was the least of its problems.

    • calebJ

      so fat housewives, asocial shut ins, and old bitties have no right to watch television? Watch out, your favorite show will be next. I’m declaring now that you also will have no right to complain, based on your flaws. You know which flaws I mean!

      • Seth

        ^My favorite comment on this thread so far!

      • Penny

        Don’t they have Dancing with the Stars to watch each week?

    • mel

      I haven’t watched “my shows” for a while because my life changed, but these shows are DEFINITELY NOT only watched by so called “shut ins”. When I worked in the Radiology Department in the hospital we had a lunch room with a TV with a 1/2 hour lunch. At 1 pm the first shift would go in, watch the first half, then the second shift would finish up and we’d compare notes. This group included receptionists, medical transcriptionists, radiology techs, managers, and even the occasional radiologist. It helped make us a better group of health care professionals by giving us a common fun thing to talk about instead of only the cancer, heart problems, etc. we saw multiple times each day. You sir are a douche!

      • Ian

        You really had nothing else to talk about other than horribly bad TV shows? Were newspapers and books not allowed during that 1/2 hour lunch? It’s funny, but the 15 or so people in my office have no clue what most of their coworkers watch on TV but we find plenty of things to talk about everyday without it revolving around comparing notes about half an episode of a soap opera. Thank God, too. If I had to hear a bunch of blathering on about evil twins, amnesia, and who slept with who on a horribly written and horribly acted melodrama, I’d have killed myself.

    • Dave

      harsh but true … tv is a constantly evolving entity and soaps aren’t a money-maker or a major form of entertainment anymore. that said, i watched The Talk for the first time ever yesterday … i would’ve rather spent an hour watching a soap.

    • Lincoln

      I’m 28, successful, very healthy, male, and I watch soaps. Nothing wrong with that! I love General Hospital. It’s fun to watch. I’m not a fat housewife, asocial shut in, and/or an old bittie. LOL.

    • Kan

      I’m sick of internet trolls like you commenting on stories they claim to care nothing about. If your life is so fabulous, then why are you taking the time to read these stories, much less comment? Oh that’s right, because you have no life.

      • Ian

        I don’t care about soaps at all, and hate them, but I was interested in the story. I think it’s hilarious that Hoover is tricking disgruntled soap fans into giving them free publicity, while they save the money they were wasting by buying ads on shows with rapidly declining ratings. Hoover knows they’re better off not wasting their money, and they still get free publicity from it because of soap fans spreading the word online, lol.

    • Judy

      These soaps’ ratings have not been great because ABC doesn’t listen to the fans. They have killed off popular characters and replaced them with terrible ones, and they have held on to ABYSMAL writers who have no creativity whatsoever. That said, there are stellar actors on both shows, and their talent is the reason I tune in. I’m a single working woman, but even if I was a housewife or old BIDDY (which is how it’s spelled), I would tune in for the talent. It’s awful to think that I won’t be able to see these amazing actors anymore, and I will definitely be buying a Hoover when I need a vacuum. Thanks, Hoover!

      • Ian

        If they were amazing actors, you’d see them again, plain and simple. Good actors have more than soap opera on their resume. The fact that soap fans always point out that “A lot of big stars got their start on soaps!” is all the proof you need. They got their start there, and then left for bigger and better things.

      • Jill

        I agree with you Judy. To the poster who said that said to suck it up, you don’t know everybody’s situation. This is to the firsft poster: I’m am 31 years old and I am disabled. I have trouble finding employment because of my disability. So, how about have your facts straight because you start judging other people.

    • Tallulah Bankhead

      YOU suck! I am not lonely or bitter and have watched AMC since 1971 you crud!!!

    • Kim

      I am a full time corp. employee for a large company, I have watched these shows since I was 5 with my mom, and I am 37 now. I DVR my soaps and watch them on weekends when my fiancé is at his high profile job, so all types of people are soap opera fans, not just the stereo type of person you think are. Soap opera fans are like sports fans, very loyal to there team. What other shows have you ever watched that are new everyday, no reruns, no seasons, just new shows everyday for 40 + years, except the news I know of none.

      • Ian

        Every talk show that’s lasted that long. The Tonight Show for example, lol. Maybe if the soaps tried having seasons and only producing a set number of episodes in a season, they wouldn’t be in this trouble. The quality might improve, their budgets would be smaller, they’d have less pressure to deliver ratings year-round, but of course their “Loyal” fans would disappear immediately, and latch on to some other show, when they had to suffer the horror of not seeing the show for a few months.

      • Lois

        Ian, what daytime talk shows have lasted 40 years? None. And daytime talk shows, unlike soaps, show re-runs.
        The Tonight show is a late night show, and has succeeded by re-inventing itself with new hosts. The name may be same, but Jay’s Tonight show isn’t Conan’s Tonight show or Johnny Carson’s Tonight show. Late night talk shows also show re-runs.

    • kerry

      It’s “biddies”, not “Bitties”. At least get your insults right.

    • kerry

      “Biddies”, not “bitties”. Bitties are your ideas.

    • Jeze

      I don’t think you’re bitter at all. I agree with you, and this is coming from someone who grew up watching Days of our Lives and recently started watching General Hospital. People are taking AMC and OLTL’s cancellations as personal vendettas against soaps, but I wonder if these people actually looked at the ratings?? For years, these soaps have hovered around 2.0-2.5 million viewers. Any show on primetime or cable with those kind of ratings would be long gone. Of all the 7 remaining soaps, total viewership of the soaps combined is barely 16 million, when 10 years ago, each of those soaps brought in about 10 million viewers individually. I understand that it’s sad, and these shows have been on the air for forever, but be real — they aren’t bringing in viewers and they aren’t bringing in enough money (which is the whole point). Production costs outweigh profits, simple as that. And to top it off, the quality of the shows certainly aren’t what they used to be, which I suspect is one of the main reasons viewers tuned out in the first place. Life 10 years ago isn’t that much different from what it is today, but the quality of these shows is much poorer.

      • maggie

        Ratings are a joke. They just mean that out of the several thousand homes hooked up to Nielsen ratings boxes, less of those people are watching live. Even those people could be watching later through DVRs or online.
        Nielsen is counting what tens of thousands of people watch and guessing that it equals what 300 million people watch. What an outdated system.

      • Ian

        Outdated or not, it’s been proven to be extremely accurate for how it works. They can also count DVR and timeshifted viewings. Most shows use the timeshifted info to sell X amount of deals for product placement, to make sure their ads aren’t lost in fastforwarding. Deal with reality…..soaps ratings are in the toilet. There’s a massive increase in channels, people watching OTHER shows on DVR at a time when they might have settled for soaps since nothing else was on at that time before, the huge amount of entertainment time taken by the internet, and a multitude of other entertainment choice…your denial that ALL of these factors have indeed destroyed the number of viewers of soaps (and a lot of other things as well), is ridiculous and completely out of touch with the modern show business situation. Soap ratings are in the toilet, and their viewership has been eroding for years. Deal with it, and move on to something else.

      • Lois

        Exactly how has the ratings system been “proven to be extremely accurate”? Did they ask every person in the US what they watched and it matched the ratings? Anyone who thinks that ratings are “extremely accurate” is delusional. There’s no way that a few thousand people can represent 300,000,000 people. My family was a Nielsen family when I was in high school. There were many times when we watched something that no one else I knew watched. Yet our viewing counted for hundreds of thousands of viewers. What a joke.

      • Ian

        They use 25,000 households spread across the country. Each household doesn’t represent the whole country, they each represent their region of the country. Any time they’ve done other types of market research, whether on the phone, online, or through the mail, the numbers match up extremely well with Nielsen. Whenever advertisers conduct their own research, the data also matches up very well with Nielsen. Nobody is gonna expend the time, money, and effort necessary to ask EVERY household in the country their opinion. That would be idiotic to expect them to do so. But they’ve gone to great lengths to make their system as accurate as possible. Their entire business is predicated on being somewhat accurate as they have nothing to gain from what the data shows. Maybe because your personal tastes don’t match up well with the data, you assume that the numbers can’t be close to accurate, but believe me they are. I know almost NO ONE who watches American Idol or CSI, yet both shows are very close to the top of the ratings every episode. That doesn’t mean I think the numbers are BS, just because the people I know don’t watch them. Keep in mind also, that those little diaries and boxes that Nielsen families use to record what people watch are NOT the only thing they take into account to determine those numbers.

    • Jess

      I watch these soap operas and I am 25, employed, college educated and have a very active social life. I also watch soap net and buy the soap magazines. I am not a house wife, a shut in or an old lady.

    • X

      F**** off Hoover, who ever you are. Do you really think your whiny protest will stop0 ABC from making the best decision for the network, think again crybaby. These two soaps were sucking the life out of the channel, time for some new fresh shows. The damn things have been on the screen for 48 years for god sake, let them rest.

      • Um…

        You do know that Hoover is a vacuum cleaner company and not a person, don’t you? And that they make decisions based on what’s good for their business? Or maybe you’ve never cleaned your basement apartment.

    • shirley stout


    • Belinda Dutton

      I guess us fat people really wanted to change the soaps to a Food channel, right?

    • Erica Kane

      What happened to Variety Shows? What do you call American Idol, America’s Got Talent and DWTS? As for mini-series – Mildred Pierce on HBO, Pillars of the Earth on Showtime, etc. You catch my drift. Maybe the Soaps can find a new home on another network? I grew up with my mom watching Love of Life (with Christopher Reeve) and I devoted many years to AMC. It’s really sad to see an institution disappear…

    • Jane A Polley

      Who’s Brat are you?? I will Move On to other networks!!

  • soapy

    The soaps ARE making money for the network. Claiming they are not is a FALSEHOOD. The network is simply trying to spend less on the front end, loyal fans be damned.

    • maryanne

      first of all, this is brilliant. somebody who works for hoover is very very smart. who watches soaps? people who are around to watch daytime tv. who uses the vacuum? people who are around to watch daytime tv. totally brilliant

      • bringbackrocky

        Except your theory is completely last century. Since many homes now have access to a DVR, people watch soaps – or, for that matter, any show – whenever they want. Maybe Hoover is honestly expressing outrage the best way it can. Not everything is motivated by money.

      • NotAHousewife

        Except we are a changing society and watching a show live is not as typical anymore. The live ratings have declined, no doubting that but these soaps are still being watched. ABC does offer their soaps to watch online. In fact, they net more in online viewership (in the 8 million range as an average), and on par with primetime online viewership.

        Part of there reason why soaps have suffered over the years is because the studio executives did not understand the change in the times. They used to. We were a changing society in the 80s and 90s and they used to understand their audience and the stories that mattered to them. Ever since a certain Head of ABC Daytime came into power at the beginning of the decade, he controlled the stories being told more than other head of daytimes past. Soap ratings have declined across the board for several reasons, but for ABC specifically, a lot of it has to due with one Mr. Brian Frons. He’s just trying to save his ass, placing blame on the viewers than to himself, with this move.

      • m.

        Except if you watch it from the DVR, you’ll skip the advertisments = ABC gets no money.
        ABC isn’t greedy, ABC is business. Their purpose is to make money for their investors.

    • Ian

      If they were making anywhere near the money they made before they’d keep them around. Every show on a network can make money, but it doesn’t mean every show is worth keeping around. They try to sell a lot of product placement ads to using the DVR argument for it, but the fact is the rating added to the timeshifted views still don’t add up to the numbers a show needs to be worth keeping on the air. If you spent $50,000 an episode on a show, and sold $60,000 in ads for the episode, it doesn’t necessarily make it worth producing. The reality is that for ABC’s purpose, it is losing money, because they could make MORE of a profit with something else. In essence, soaps are most definitely losing money, and still rapidly losing viewers. They’re also in a losing venture by owning the Soapnetwork, so it’s gonna be gone too.

  • lene

    HECK YES!!!!! We want our soaps!

    • dee dee1

      Yeah! Go Hoover!!!

  • Stephanie

    Also have to add… OLTL has been *UNDER* budget and creatively sound.

    • TV Gord

      Under budget, but still not making a profit.

      • halo

        Under budget mean UNDER BUDGET
        If ABC weren’t throwing money around like water- yes the shows make money
        And if this is REALLY about advertising money – Do you really think ABC can charge the same dollars for spots on the new replacement shows? Right, so doesn’t that mean ABC WILL LOOSE MONEY FROM SPONSERS? IF THEY ARE FORCED TO CHARGE HALF FOR SPOTS IN THE AMC/OLTL spot
        Sorry TV Gord, you need better logic.

      • Ian

        Not if they’re spending less to make those new shows, and they give them a chance to find an audience. ABC’s view is that they can make more profit on another show, therefore they ARE losing money by keeping sinking soaps on the air even as their viewer numbers continue to decline. This isn’t something new people. The numbers for these shows have been steadily dropping for years. You could probably trace the decline back to the early to mid-90’s, AKA the dawn of the internet.

      • halo

        If your home budge is say 12,000
        but you only spend 11,500
        How much money do you have? 500 that you do whatever with. So what pray tell was ABC doing with the money that was budgeted but not used??
        Obviously wasting money on another Tori Spelling reality show (screened so poorly they canned it) or the BabaWaWa male view (again so bad it was canned)
        It’s simple math.

        Here’s the better question:
        What is ABC going to charge advertisers in those same time slots? That same for 2/3 million for barely 800K?
        No wonder why Hoover is pulling out of ABC.
        ABC is making a huge mistake here by alienating the people who buy stuff for the tweens in the first place. You are entitled to your opinion.
        Something is rotten in Denmark but it’s not the cheese.

  • lene

    I ain’t no fat housewife. I’m 20 years old, and 99 punds,*itch! But what so what if i was? Housewives should get to watch whatever the eff they want. SOAP RULES!

    • Agent Smith

      Too bad that too few of them watch these soaps. A soap’s only income is from advertising (they don’t get sold on DVD), and advertising revenue is based on the type and quality (according to advertiser standards) of the viewers. Too few, and there’s not enough money to make a profit. Your comment suggests that if any small group wants to watch a particular program, someone should make it for them. Reality doesn’t work that way.

  • Elle

    Though I’m not a fat housewife, asocial shut in, or an old bittie…I still appreciate Hoover for standing up for soaps.

    Fun fact: variety and miniseries actually still do exist. Also, most shows in primetime are soaps…they just don’t get called that.

    I’d rather see One Life to Live continue any day over some random food show.

    • chillydogs

      Hooray for Hoover! More sponsors should do this!
      And ABC, the world is changing and you should have found a way to change the soaps to match. If you think producing an hour long show 5 days a week is too expensive, then find a new format! If you think 18-49 is the only demo that matters, guess again! The boomers are aging and taking their disposable income with them. So if you can’t keep up and find new ways to satisfy your viewers, the viewers (and sponsors) will go elsewhere. No one wants more reality or food shows. That is just garbage.

  • Kristin

    This is not true! OLTL & AMC has millions of people who watch the shows each day. A lot of those people are teens, college students, men (yes men), & olderish people. I am 30 & everyday when I get off work I watch my soaps. In fact OLTL is the only ABC soap that is constantly under budget every year! It also has been having a ratings INCREASE.

    • AcaseofGeo

      Incorrect. Its ratings have been in steady decline. It was actually rated LOWER than ATWT which was cancelled last year. This is strictly a money issue. The soaps don’t make what they used to. Its sad that EVERYTHING comes down to money. These soaps, and mine (ATWT) have entertained people for decades and its sad the networks are allowing a beloved entertainment form to die out.

      • YoungNewSexyHooverUser

        It’s quite sad because it did not have to be this way. It’s been obvious to fans for years what needed to be done to save our soaps. The head honchos refused to listen to the fans even when they knew they were heading down this path. But that’s probably what they had intended all along. With the onslaught of reality television in the early 00s, they saw how much cheaper they would be to produce, while continuing to make bank in advertisement. Our soaps were not dying out; they were being murdered! They have been for awhile.

      • maggie

        Ratings are a joke. To think they can monitor a few thousand homes and from that determine what over 300 million people watch is ridiculous. They also need to realize that people dvr shows or watch online.

      • Kim

        NO television shows in the middle of the day get ratings like the soaps used to get. OLTL was actually doing well FOR THE MARKET. While the news shows cost way less, they are crazy if they think they’re going to get viewer loyalty that’s anything close to serial drama.

      • Ian

        @ maggie — They KNOW how many people DVR it and watch online, lol. That is just as easy to track. The Nielsen system is pretty accurate. People in charge of spending millions in ad dollars are confident enough in it to use it to determine who gets their money. They know where people are seeing their ads. Just because soap fan Maggie doesn’t think Nielsen is accurate, doesn’t mean it isn’t. The people that need to know if it works don’t need your opinion on it, lol

        @ Kim — They don’t care about loyalty, they care about numbers. Soaps just don’t get the numbers they want. I hate to break it to any middle-aged soap fans, but the networks don’t want you and won’t make money on you no matter how many of you watch and no matter how loyal you are. The networks need the 18-34 market to watch, as they make nearly all of their money on that demo. That’s who advertisers want, and that’s who the networks will cater to. A million 18-34 year-olds watching is literally worth more to a network than 10 million 50 year-olds. That’s just the reality of it.

      • maggie

        @Ian – Funny that you called me “soap fan Maggie” because I don’t watch either All My Children or One Life To Live, so cancelling them won’t effect me at all.
        Nielsen is a joke in that a few thousand families are used to determine what 300 million people watch. Nielsen only counts DVR’d shows if the Nielsen family watches the show within 3 days of the original airing. It’s called “Live plus 3.” They don’t add online viewing numbers to the ratings, as they usually don’t have the same ads as the original viewing, and they are only interested in ad supported viewings. Nielsen doesn’t add the ratings from SoapNet to the original daytime ratings. SoapNet ratings are counted separately.
        The networks and people who buy ads aren’t “confident enough in” Nielsen. From the NYTimes:
        “For many years, TV networks have frequently disputed the accuracy of Nielsen data, in areas like viewership among young men. Advertisers have cast doubt on Nielsen figures, too, wondering if they are getting value for all the money they spend to buy commercials — an estimated $70 billion each year.

        Agencies have been miffed, too, believing their ability to find the right channels and networks for their clients are called into question if their advertiser clients take issue with the accuracy of the ratings.

        The fact that new technologies like set-top boxes and digital video recorders enable data to be compiled more readily seems to be fueling the desire of the consortium members to take another crack at creating a competitor to Nielsen.
        According to the representatives, media companies that own all the major broadcasters, as well as several large cable channels, are taking part or talking about taking part in the effort. The media companies involved were identified as the CBS Corporation, which owns CBS and half of CW; Discovery Communications, owner of Discovery Channel and other popular cable channels; the Walt Disney Company, which owns properties like ABC, ABC Family and ESPN; NBC Universal, the General Electric unit that runs networks and channels like Bravo, NBC and USA; the News Corporation, owner of properties like Fox, Fox News Channel and FX; Time Warner, owner of half of CW and cable channels like TBS and TNT; and Viacom, owner of cable channels like MTV and VH1.”

      • Ian

        A lot more goes into the numbers that Nielsen compiles. Plus, they don’t have to add the online views to the ratings for networks to use the data. Networks know how many times a show has been viewed on their own site, and how many sales they have on sites like itunes. They use those numbers to sell ads on their site, hence watching commercials when you watch a show on abc.com. You seriously think they don’t tell advertisers how many times a show has been watched online when they sell them the ads, lol? And the article you copied and pasted is a bit misleading as well. Networks always question that data because they want advertisers to spend more money, and advertisers question the data because they want to spend less.

  • KC

    oh, should have read your last paragraph before tweeting this. That’s SO mean. You are mean

  • Tina

    P&G didn’t do that because THEY WANTED OUT OF THE SOAP BIZ AND OWNED THE SHOWS! DUH! Who the heck is this hack writer?!

  • Claira

    ..and even though Days is last in the ratings, they are still making money for NBC, which NBC themselves confirmed by renewing them. So OLTL MUST make money for ABC.

    • TV Gord

      Boy, some of you are making some big leaps in logic in hopes that your wild assumptions will be taken as truth. Sadly, in this idiot internet world, that’s probably what will all happen. And you’ll all be disappointed when the shows go off the air as scheduled in September and January, respectively. It’s a sad day, but burying your head in the sand (or the Hoover bag) will solve nothing.

      • OLTL Fan

        Brian Frons…Is that you?

      • TV Gord

        I’m an OLTL fan, too. I’m just not dreaming in technicolor. Soaps are done. I’ve seen it coming for more than a decade. If you haven’t you’ve been in denial.

      • Meli

        Soaps are not done. Just watch any telenovela airing on Univision or Telemundo at any time of the day or priemetime and look at their ratings. Maybe taking 5 years to tell a story on a US-made soap that only takes a telenovela 9 months to tell is.

      • gigi

        UK soaps are also huge in their market. Eastenders and Corrie have huge fan bases and also run in primetime. I would think the trend of a soaps “dying” would be a international thing. But overnseas you still have the fan base…like there is here in the US. Maybe revamping or doing shorter story arcs like Telenovelas would be the answer, but ABC needs to realize that the fans are here!

      • Elizabeth Turner

        I agree gigi. I’m a fan of both Eastenders and Corrie and so is my husband. We tape both so our daughter can catch up too.

      • Jane

        Very good point, but those shows are stylized. maybe that’s the problem- the soaps have stayed with the same formulas as far as plotting and even look. When I was a kid I used to think of NBC soaps having a yellow hue, ABC soaps having a bluish/white tone, and I never watched CBS. They look the same as they did back in the 70s. Maybe they needed to shoot outdoors more, go on location, or at least change the lighting scheme. Maybe if they had people dealing with small problems that seem huge to them (like the nighttime dramedies do, like Modern Family) but aren’t crazy huge like demonic midgets, vampires, and aliens from Eterna big. I honestly don’t care about whose sleeping with who- the fun is seeing the humanity of the characters. The modern soap went out of style because the networks and the writers let them. They needed to change with the times but they stayed in this perpetual loop that was solidified circa 1978. I’m sad to see the soaps go, but this ending was inevitable.

      • Ryn

        The DENIAL just being talked about. move on people, instead of cramming and join the real world, instead of burying your heads in Pine valley fantasies.

      • Soapstef

        Nearly all television is fantasy you moron! Are you one of these fools who believes “reality tv” is for real? Get a grip and get over the soap jealousy. At least our favorite fantasy outlived any of your craptastic sitcoms. We were able to dive into something special and watch talent develop and become real forces in entertainment today. Without soaps future stars are starting with nothing.

      • halo

        Respectfully Eff off
        really TV Gord I WORK IN TV
        And YOU don’t have a freakin clue

    • Mick

      But the problem is ABC owns OLTL, NBC doesn’t actually own Days, its distributed by Sony making a different situation.

      • gigi

        Same with Y&R and B&B

    • Kim

      It does. Frons even admitted that AMC was the real problem. They’ve also been pouring money into developing 15 possible replacement series, rather than investing in promoting AMC and OLTL to pull in viewers.

  • Claira

    SOAPS have MORE viewers then the shows on The CW. SAVE OUR SOAPS!

    • Dave

      But it’s a different profit standard, and soaps have much larger casts and have to produce material five days a week. They aren’t a cost-effective model anymore.

      • Ian

        The soaps get almost ZERO of the demo that advertisers want. It doesn’t matter how many people watch them if none of those people are the demo that advertisers want, and that’s pretty much what was happening with soaps.

    • Wha’ever

      Except pretty much all the viewers of these shows are in the right demo.

  • Maureen

    First, Hoover is pulling their ads from all of ABC…not just the soaps.

    Second, night-time cable and even network prime time shows would love to be getting the current ratings that the daytime soaps get. It is not about the ratings. There is so much more going on. Brian Frons has not supported soaps since he took the job of Daytime president. And when he was put in charge of Soapnet, he worked really hard at moving the channel away from soaps. According to Mr. Frons, soap fans are not the right demo.

    But what it comes down to is that network execs are not doing their jobs because they base their decisions on an out-dated ratings system that has been around (and not improved) since the 1950s…as well as the post-WW II yardstick that the important money is in the hands of the youth. Except that young generation back in the day has now aged…and they still have the money. So instead of canceling these shows…fire the execs who are not doing their best work for the network and their sponsors.

    • Claudia

      i totally agree thank you for saying it so clearly and concisely.

    • Peg Bundy

      I agree too. The Nielsen system is outdated. How can they measure what people watch on mobile devices? Do they even count On Demand? I don’t think those are included in Nielsen ratings.

    • halo

      Cheers Maureen you nailed it!!!

    • cindy

      I agree. I don’t watch ABC/CBS/NBC at any time.
      I only watch the soaps. So what ever they are “selling” their advertisers they are wrong! The other viewing I do is on Fox so your advertizsers need to put your money there!
      Maybe Fox will read this and add a soap!

  • Katie

    It’s a known FACT that OLTL runs always underbudget and is the most profitable soap for ABC the problem is that ABC Daytime wants cheap crap to fill their airtime hence the reality shows.

    • TV Gord

      Not profitable. There’s a difference between under budget and profitable. Soaps are NOT making money for the network. I love them, too, and I’m going to miss OLTL especially, but we’re lucky we’ve had them THIS long!

      • J

        What does that tell us about ABC Daytime’s management, though? If OLTL is under budget and yet not profitable, who’s setting that budget?

        The fact that the soaps’ ratings have steadily declined under Brian Frons’s tenure, yet he still has his job, indicates what ABC soap fans have suspected for years: the soaps were being intentionally sabotaged so ABC could bring in cheaper programming.

      • TV Gord

        J, I agree with you, especially about Frons sabotaging the soaps, but the reality is fans have defected from soaps by the millions in the past decade or so. Those of us still watching are FFin the commercials almost all the time, so they can’t attract advertisers anymore. I think Hoover may have already had a problem with ABC, and they might be just taking advantage of this situation to generate a lot of goodwill among the dwindling numbers of soap fans who remain.

      • Donna

        Okay Frons, sure, we all believe you love the soaps. I am sure here really was a tear in your eye when you cancelled them. F-Off

      • Ian

        They don’t need to sabotage anything. 90% of the companies that advertise on network TV are after the younger demo, and soaps don;’t deliver that at all. If a soap is only getting a fraction of the overall numbers they got a decade ago, then obviously the number of younger viewers is only a fraction of what it once was too.

  • Jenny

    Good for Hoover. At least someone is listening to the fans. Those bashing soaps they only thing that is different than the scripted drama at night is the time of day they are shown and the number of episodes they produce.

    • Jeze

      I think that’s the problem though. Primetime scripted dramas produce roughly 15 episodes a season, while soaps produce that much in less than a month. They aren’t bringing in the money to keep total profits in the green but costing significantly more to produce. I think they should have changed the soap models, and fans have come up with plenty of ideas to help soaps, but I think execs really just aren’t interested in soaps any more, and the ratings basically justify their desire to cancel these shows.

    • Yeah

      That is incredibly untrue. Really. Watch again and if you don’t find a difference in quality between soap-operas and prime-time dramas… then your case is hopeless – especially those last few years.
      Then again, I’m not saying every prime-time show is good, far from it – but even if I was a fan of soap-operas, denying that they’re way below prime-time dramas quality-wise would just be dellusional.

  • Tess

    I would hope that Hoover makes it clear to ABC that they are pulling their ads from the network directly because of the decision to cancel the two soaps; otherwise, ABC will not think much of this move. I appreciate the fact that there is at least one sponsor who is offering to support the fans, but I hope this is not just some ploy to get advertising by announcing you won’t be advertising there but rather an actual effort by Hoover to not cancel these shows.

    • Gail

      I’m thinking from the way this movement is growing, Hoover is first of many.

      • Amy

        I am thinking the same thing Gail. Even if Hoover did it for marketing, others are likely to follow based on the response the Hoover decision is getting!

    • dorothy

      I agree with Tess & Gail, GOOD for Hoover, i pray more sponsors like General Mills & Target will follow. I’ve watched AMC sence day one.When i worked i used vcr then dvr. rethink please please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Page: 1 2 3 11
Add your comment
The rules: Keep it clean, and stay on the subject - or we may delete your comment. If you see inappropriate language, e-mail us. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field.

When you click on the "Post Comment" button above to submit your comments, you are indicating your acceptance of and are agreeing to the Terms of Service. You can also read our Privacy Policy.


Latest Videos in TV

From Our Partners

TV Recaps

Powered by WordPress.com VIP