• Hi, I am the owner and main administrator of Styleforum. If you find the forum useful and fun, please help support it by buying through the posted links on the forum. Our main, very popular sales thread, where the latest and best sales are listed, are posted HERE

    Purchases made through some of our links earns a commission for the forum and allows us to do the work of maintaining and improving it. Finally, thanks for being a part of this community. We realize that there are many choices today on the internet, and we have all of you to thank for making Styleforum the foremost destination for discussions of menswear.
  • This site contains affiliate links for which Styleforum may be compensated.
  • We would like to welcome House of Huntington as an official Affiliate Vendor. Shop past season Drake's, Nigel Cabourn, Private White V.C. and other menswear luxury brands at exceptional prices below retail. Please visit the Houise of Huntington thread and welcome them to the forum.

  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

    Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

TV shows with the highest percentage of wealthiest viewers

whusurdadi

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
6,112
Reaction score
19
Of course Mad Men tops the list
lol8[1].gif


here
 

Ataturk

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
14,843
Reaction score
2,935
"Nearly half of 'Mad Men' households make more than $100K"

Turns out I've been "wealthy" all along and never realized it. Horray!
 

HRoi

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Messages
25,242
Reaction score
16,136
not sure a household income of $100K plus is necessarily wealthy, especially in big cities. that's $50k apiece in a two-income family. better than many, of course, but prolly not truly wealthy.

ps - The Closer is ****. there are 5.1 million people who watch that drivel?
 

milosz

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2008
Messages
3,883
Reaction score
11
"wealthy viewers" /= "wealthiest viewers"

some of y'all need to learn to read
 

HRoi

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Messages
25,242
Reaction score
16,136
Originally Posted by milosz
"wealthy viewers" /= "wealthiest viewers" some of y'all need to learn to read
so, this graphic doesn't tell you that the report writers are inferring that $100k+ is "wealthy"?
eh.gif
(or if you prefer, rich, loaded or affluent?)
146336-mad_men_wealthy_viewers_072610_chart_500.jpg
 

milosz

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2008
Messages
3,883
Reaction score
11
The article headline specifically uses wealthiest - in a comparison of TV shows, the income of Mad Men viewers is highest. This makes those viewers the 'wealthiest,' even if not 'wealthy.'

One is used comparatively, one is not.
 

HRoi

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Messages
25,242
Reaction score
16,136
i see it differently. the writers use a cut off of $100k to define a threshold by which a household would be considered "wealthy" (the definition of which i disagree with), and proceed to find the shows with the highest percentage of viewers above that threshold (i.e. the so called wealthy).

but it doesn't matter. sorry to derail the thread.
 

videocrew

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2009
Messages
503
Reaction score
2
Wouldn't the show with the wealthiest viewers just have the highest mean income of viewers? This just shows who has the most (arbitrarily designated) wealthy viewers.
 

milosz

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2008
Messages
3,883
Reaction score
11
Originally Posted by HRoi
i see it differently. the writers use a cut off of $100k to define a threshold by which a household would be considered "wealthy" (the definition of which i disagree with), and proceed to find the shows with the highest percentage of viewers above that threshold (i.e. the so called wealthy).

Except that the article never uses the word 'wealthy.' It uses 'wealthiest,' which is the comparative form.

I make jack ****, but put me in a room with five homeless guys and I'm the wealthiest. I may or may not be 'wealthy.'
 

AR_Six

"Sookie!"
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
10,709
Reaction score
230
Originally Posted by milosz
Except that the article never uses the word 'wealthy.' It uses 'wealthiest,' which is the comparative form.
Uh... I didn't even care enough to click the link, but the graph he xposted uses the words "affluent", "rich" and "loaded". You'd have to be pretty obtuse to deny the implication.
 

milosz

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2008
Messages
3,883
Reaction score
11
The argument they were having was about whether or not $100k is 'wealthy' - because the OP used that in his title, despite the actual headline being wealthiest. I'm merely trying to point out that none of them will ever be wealthy if they don't understand the difference in -y and -iest.

The graphic, the headline and the article were all created by different people, so the graphic's wording is a separate issue.
 

Featured Sponsor

How important is full vs half canvas to you for heavier sport jackets?

  • Definitely full canvas only

    Votes: 55 35.0%
  • Half canvas is fine

    Votes: 61 38.9%
  • Really don't care

    Votes: 17 10.8%
  • Depends on fabric

    Votes: 27 17.2%
  • Depends on price

    Votes: 29 18.5%

Forum statistics

Threads
505,239
Messages
10,579,651
Members
223,907
Latest member
peaswqae
Top