The original Rangers broadcast averaged a 1.7 rating nationwide. Which means that if it really got a 3.4 on "the west coast" it did even worse than 1.7 on stations receiving the East Coast feed. As for the actual numbers, we've only seen specific ratings from three or four individual cities in California, and ratings vary widely. A show that pulls a 3.4 in San Diego might get a 1.2 in Burbank or Beverly Hills. JMS cited numbers from two or three cities, withougt naming them, in one post, and someone found a local cable system's website the gave the adjusted ratings for their coverage area. Beyond that we have no actual data apart from the overall average of 1.7.
As JMS has recently mentioned (and as I've been suggesting for months) there was also the ownership issue. If Rangers had received exactly the same rating, but had been produced by Universal Studios or Sci-Fi Studios. odds are it would have been picked up. If Warner Bros. had been willing to cut Sci-Fi or USA Networks into an ownership deal, it probably would have been picked up. If it had received much better ratings (I believe they were looking for something in the 2.7 to 3.0 range for the heavily promoted one-shot movie) they probably would have picked it up, despite its being a Warner Bros. production.
But the combination of the ratings and the 100% Warner Bros. ownership didn't leave Sci-Fi with any compelling reason to put a Rangers series into production.
Regards,
Joe
