[home] [news]  [episode guide] [album guide] [collector's corner] [FAQ] [people & places] [brush with velvet] [gallery] [downloads] [store]

The Partridge Family Bulletin Board Forum Index
The Partridge Family Bulletin Board
C'mon, Get Happy!
 
[FAQ] [Search] [Memberlist] [Usergroups] [Register] [Profile] [Log in to check your private messages] [Log in

Ratings for a few season 3 episodes!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Partridge Family Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Talk About The Show!
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Scott
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 3962
Location: San Pueblo, CA

PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ricky may have turned current audiences away but their hope was to expand on their core audience, which was the younger set and to breath some new life into the series.

If I recall, Wesley Eure and his father were going to move in next door. Shirley would have married the new neighbor and the blended family would have been how Wesley's character joined the group while Keith was away at college.

It's funny, because Bob Claver even told me that they knew in the third year that the series was on the decline.

Here's a link to an interview with Wesley Eure talking about the PF.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FVs3ICdB4E
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
irving
Tracy's Sitter
Tracy's Sitter


Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Posts: 59
Location: New Jersey, USA

PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Scott,
Thanks for that link. David Cassidy was signed for 4 seasons, after that he left. I never heard of Wesley Ure before.
If David did not want to be replaced he'd have done a fifth year.
I don't understand why Bob Claver would think the show was over because its 3rd season ratings were lower than in season two. After all, the Nielsen ratings I found prove that The PF was still very popular all through its third year, even remaining in the top twenty right before the June 1973 move opposite All In The Family. Yes the average rating dropped from 22.6 in year 2 to 20.6 in year three-but that does not mean the show was over. Look at the yearly ratings for 'Little House On The Prairie"- it went up and down several times during its 9 seasons, yet it was a popular show to the end. And even "All In The Family's" ratings dropped year to year. The PF was even making it into the top ten during the end of its first run 3rd year episodes!
I disagree with Bob Claver- it would have remained a top show if left in its Friday nite time slot for the 4th year. the Nielsen ratings prove this!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
irving
Tracy's Sitter
Tracy's Sitter


Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Posts: 59
Location: New Jersey, USA

PostPosted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 12:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

One of the most popular episodes of The Partridge Family was episode # 69-
"Everything You Wanted To Know About Sex... But Couldn't Pronounce."
It first aired on Feb. 23,1973 and was #12 in the top twenty that week. The Nielsen rating was 25.2, making it one of the highest rated episodes of the show's 4 year run! This was the one in which Keith was failing in his sex education class. While the third season averaged a 20.6 Nielsen rating it is interesting to note that the episodes that aired during February and March , 1973-the end of the third season, all had higher ratings than that! The show's ratings were actually climbing at the end of the third season!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marquise
Tracy's Sitter
Tracy's Sitter


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 66

PostPosted: Sun Jun 05, 2011 4:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looking over the numbers you provided irving I would have to agree with you that the show was still healthy in it's third year.

I know David didn't want to return for a 5th season and ABC moved the show against AIF as a "counter-programming" strategy and those two factors effectively killed it off.

I was just a mere 6 years old when this show went off the air and am only going by information I have read about the show over the years but it would have been interesting to see what would have happened if TPF would have stayed in it's original time slot and garnered the respectable ratings that third year achieved. I think ABC would have thought twice about cancelling it whether DC returned or not.

But we will never know the answer to that... Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
irving
Tracy's Sitter
Tracy's Sitter


Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Posts: 59
Location: New Jersey, USA

PostPosted: Sun Jun 05, 2011 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Marquise wrote:
Looking over the numbers you provided irving I would have to agree with you that the show was still healthy in it's third year.

I know David didn't want to return for a 5th season and ABC moved the show against AIF as a "counter-programming" strategy and those two factors effectively killed it off.

I was just a mere 6 years old when this show went off the air and am only going by information I have read about the show over the years but it would have been interesting to see what would have happened if TPF would have stayed in it's original time slot and garnered the respectable ratings that third year achieved. I think ABC would have thought twice about cancelling it whether DC returned or not.

But we will never know the answer to that... Smile

I believe that had David decided to do another season or two ABC would have left it on in it's Friday night time slot and it would have continued to get high ratings. But with David leaving, both Screen Gems, and ABC seemed to lose interest in the show. ABC probably figured they had nothing to lose by putting the PF on Saturday nights opposite AITF because there was not going to be a 5th year without David anyway.
I personally doubt the show would have remained high rated if it went on without David and if they had replaced him I would have stopped watching it.
I read the fan magazines back then and there was no mention of Shirley getting married and David being replaced despite what some have claimed in recent years. I was 12 when the show began and it was fun! The Partridge Family was on at the perfect time- the early 70's.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scott
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 3962
Location: San Pueblo, CA

PostPosted: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

By all means, if it wasn't in Tiger Beat, it must not be true. Laughing That's like saying the Holocaust didn't happen because it wasn't in Highlights Magazine. Laughing

The executive producer of the series must be full of it too. Laughing

I give up. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
irving
Tracy's Sitter
Tracy's Sitter


Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Posts: 59
Location: New Jersey, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Scott wrote:
By all means, if it wasn't in Tiger Beat, it must not be true. Laughing That's like saying the Holocaust didn't happen because it wasn't in Highlights Magazine. Laughing

The executive producer of the series must be full of it too. Laughing

I give up. Laughing


I would not downplay the Holocaust by making such a statement- if the Nazi's had won my parents and I would never have been born. Crying or Very sad
I do not believe claims by an actor I have never heard of before contradicting information that was provided during the time the PF was on the air- indeed such claims were not made until decades after the show ended. There was nothing in any media, not just Tiger Beat (LOL) about Wesley Eure Rolling Eyes or anyone else replacing DC back then.
As far as Bob Claver is concerned- the Nielsen ratings for The Partridge Family show that it was a top twenty hit throughout its third season and was in the Top Ten as late as March 1973- the end of the first run episodes for that season. And even in June 1973, during reruns, the show was still in the top twenty before being moved to Saturdays.
Scott- did you watch the show during its initial run on ABC? I did.
The fact is- The Partridge Family remained a top twenty show all through out its third season. It was a stupid decision by ABC to move it to Saturdays the final year. Even Dave Madden thought it was a stupid move by ABC.
I do not know why you take exeption to the show's third season Nielsen ratings.
My whole point is that the PF was a very popular show through its first 3 seasons, and would have remained so during the fourth year if it had been left in it's Friday night time slot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
irving
Tracy's Sitter
Tracy's Sitter


Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Posts: 59
Location: New Jersey, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 1:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought I'd share some information about the Partridge Family's ratings in syndication. In 1977 the show was reaching 7% of all (U.S.) households. (A 7.0 Nielsen rating.) This broke down into 3,792,000 children; 3,458,000 adults and 2,326,000 teens. The show was being telecast in 71 markets. Of the 9,576,000 viewers nearly 40 % were children, about the same percentage (38%) as when the show aired on ABC. Adults made up 36% and teens 24%.
The 1977 Nielsen Report on TV in the ranking of syndicated programs based on Nielsen November 1976 Report ranked The Partridge Family at #10 (tied with Bugs Bunny and Emergency 1) with a 11.3 rating among children ages 2-11!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scott
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 3962
Location: San Pueblo, CA

PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 2:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not sure how my watching The Partridge Family during it's initial run is relevant to the topic, Rolling Eyes but to answer your question -- yes, I watched it during it's original run, and original reruns, reruns of reruns, right up until the DVDs were released -- which, by the way, I worked on. Laughing Also, I bought trading cards, posters, coloring books, comic books, View Masters, board games and a lunch box with my hard earned allowance. Laughing

I will try and clarify what I posted before because you're misunderstanding my train of thought.

1. I do not dispute whatever numbers you've found online for Season Three's ratings. I simply stated that various factors indicated to Bob Claver that the show was showing it's age during Season Three. Many other things could have given him pause than just the ratings. It could have been the decline in record sales, the decline in radio stations agreeing to play new record singles, the decline in merchandising sales/royalties, the decline of magazines and newspapers to cover PF/DC related stories, the fact that the show was very expensive to produce, (compared to other series at the time), etc. etc. etc. He's been in the business a long, long time, so forgive me if I give his opinion a lot more weight than yours.

2. I never said that the PF would have been canceled if it weren't moved to Saturday. If ABC kept their Friday night lineup in place, there's a good shot that the show would have gone on another season. Shirley Jones, Dave Madden and others have told me they thought the same. Personally, I think the scripts for Season Four were pretty bad compared to the other three.

3. If The Partridge Family's ratings were still solid -- whether it aired on Friday or Saturday night, and David Cassidy still wanted to leave the series after Season Four, ABC would have kept the show going and replaced David Cassidy. I do not know why you have such a hard time understanding that the network is in it to make money. They would have milked the show dry if there was a way to make money with high ratings and advertising dollars. That's why Laverne continued without Shirley, Kotter continued without Barbarino, McMillan continued without his wife, Bo and Luke Duke were replaced, Charlie found another Angel, Cheers kept serving beer without Shelly Long, "Valerie" became "The Hogan Family," Archie continued without Edith, "The West Wing" continued without Rob Lowe, Two and a Half Men is continuing without Charlie Sheen, Law and Order SVU without it's 2 lead stars, etc. etc. etc. Whew! I'm sure there are more. Laughing Laughing

4. I have worked in the Studio system long enough to know that a network does not "kill a show" by moving it to a suicide time slot simply because an actor is leaving and they want to be done with it. Whether the move was dumb or not (yes, I think it was dumb) there was a reason that made business sense to the programming executive at the time. I still believe it was a counter programming measure because the demographic for the PF skewed younger than what CBS and NBC aired at the same time. Dumb move? Yes. On purpose to kill the show because David Cassidy was leaving anyway? That makes absolutely no business sense to me. Rather, they would have kept it on Fridays, enjoyed another year of high ratings and high advertising dollars, and replaced David Cassidy with Wesley Eure, Rick Springfield, or any of the other names that have been bandied about over the years. They must have had confidence that the show would have given the other 2 networks a run for their money. As it is, they ruined their Friday night block of programming. Everything else was cancelled by the end of the fourth season or the year after. It's interesting that both Brady Bunch and Odd Couple, which bookended the PF, were not considered ratings successes, and each season were in danger of being canceled. It's widely understood that each series got renewed by the skin of it's teeth each season. In the Brady's case, they were renewed 6 months at a time, never really enjoying any kind of job security. Same with "The Odd Couple," which Jack Klugman talks about in his book. (There's a formula that networks seem to use as to what is an acceptable viewer drop-off from it's lead-in, but I'm not sure what the percentage was back then. A failure in 1974 would be a #1 hit today.)

5. If the Partridge Family was a success on Saturday nights with high enough ratings to keep it going, they would have replaced David Cassidy to see if the show would have worked without him. Would it have worked? My gut says no, but they would have given it a shot. Sorry, I don't buy the notion that Wesley Eure is full of shit simply because you never heard of him and/or never read it in Tiger Beat magazine. Lots of casting decisions are made without a press release going out. Those announcements wouldn't even be written until the series was picked up. The producers knew David Cassidy was leaving so it would make perfect sense that they would be exploring their options in the event the series sustained it's ratings. It did not, so the point is moot. I guess I don't understand why it's so hard to believe that they would have explored their options and cast someone else, contingent on the series getting a fifth season pick-up.

Last, I have a copy of David Cassidy's renegotiated contract -- somewhere -- I need to locate it. It was signed, coincidently, on his birthday -- April 12th. If I recall correctly, his salary went from $600 a week to $6,000 plus a cut of the profits, merchandising and spin-offs. (He owned a piece of "Getting Together.") Shirley's salary would have been bumped accordingly. The music was an added expense, so it wasn't a cheap show to produce. It was, in fact, expensive for it's time. With record sales in decline, I assume there was less money coming in to support new recordings, etc. Also, if I remember correctly -- (it's been so long since I had the inclination to look at this stuff) -- David Cassidy was actually supposed to leave after Season Three but agreed to come back for an abbreviated number of episodes in Season Four, then agreeing to stay the entire season. So, the producers knew this was coming for quite some time. It would have made sense that they would have at least thought about continuing without David Cassidy. OR, even they realized that there was no PF without DC, and this could be yet another reason why Bob Claver knew the series was winding down during Season Three. But, just because Bob Claver knew the series was winding down, whether it be financially, creatively, whatever, it doesn't mean the network wouldn't have milked it dry. Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
irving
Tracy's Sitter
Tracy's Sitter


Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Posts: 59
Location: New Jersey, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you for your informative reply Scott! I am going out but will try to reply to your comments tonight. I am happy to see you were also a big PF fan-you mention some interesting points, most I do agree with you on. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
irving
Tracy's Sitter
Tracy's Sitter


Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Posts: 59
Location: New Jersey, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Scott wrote:
I'm not sure how my watching The Partridge Family during it's initial run is relevant to the topic, Rolling Eyes but to answer your question -- yes, I watched it during it's original run, and original reruns, reruns of reruns, right up until the DVDs were released -- which, by the way, I worked on. Laughing Also, I bought trading cards, posters, coloring books, comic books, View Masters, board games and a lunch box with my hard earned allowance. Laughing

I will try and clarify what I posted before because you're misunderstanding my train of thought.

1. I do not dispute whatever numbers you've found online for Season Three's ratings. I simply stated that various factors indicated to Bob Claver that the show was showing it's age during Season Three. Many other things could have given him pause than just the ratings. It could have been the decline in record sales, the decline in radio stations agreeing to play new record singles, the decline in merchandising sales/royalties, the decline of magazines and newspapers to cover PF/DC related stories, the fact that the show was very expensive to produce, (compared to other series at the time), etc. etc. etc. He's been in the business a long, long time, so forgive me if I give his opinion a lot more weight than yours.

2. I never said that the PF would have been canceled if it weren't moved to Saturday. If ABC kept their Friday night lineup in place, there's a good shot that the show would have gone on another season. Shirley Jones, Dave Madden and others have told me they thought the same. Personally, I think the scripts for Season Four were pretty bad compared to the other three.

3. If The Partridge Family's ratings were still solid -- whether it aired on Friday or Saturday night, and David Cassidy still wanted to leave the series after Season Four, ABC would have kept the show going and replaced David Cassidy. I do not know why you have such a hard time understanding that the network is in it to make money. They would have milked the show dry if there was a way to make money with high ratings and advertising dollars. That's why Laverne continued without Shirley, Kotter continued without Barbarino, McMillan continued without his wife, Bo and Luke Duke were replaced, Charlie found another Angel, Cheers kept serving beer without Shelly Long, "Valerie" became "The Hogan Family," Archie continued without Edith, "The West Wing" continued without Rob Lowe, Two and a Half Men is continuing without Charlie Sheen, Law and Order SVU without it's 2 lead stars, etc. etc. etc. Whew! I'm sure there are more. Laughing Laughing

4. I have worked in the Studio system long enough to know that a network does not "kill a show" by moving it to a suicide time slot simply because an actor is leaving and they want to be done with it. Whether the move was dumb or not (yes, I think it was dumb) there was a reason that made business sense to the programming executive at the time. I still believe it was a counter programming measure because the demographic for the PF skewed younger than what CBS and NBC aired at the same time. Dumb move? Yes. On purpose to kill the show because David Cassidy was leaving anyway? That makes absolutely no business sense to me. Rather, they would have kept it on Fridays, enjoyed another year of high ratings and high advertising dollars, and replaced David Cassidy with Wesley Eure, Rick Springfield, or any of the other names that have been bandied about over the years. They must have had confidence that the show would have given the other 2 networks a run for their money. As it is, they ruined their Friday night block of programming. Everything else was cancelled by the end of the fourth season or the year after. It's interesting that both Brady Bunch and Odd Couple, which bookended the PF, were not considered ratings successes, and each season were in danger of being canceled. It's widely understood that each series got renewed by the skin of it's teeth each season. In the Brady's case, they were renewed 6 months at a time, never really enjoying any kind of job security. Same with "The Odd Couple," which Jack Klugman talks about in his book. (There's a formula that networks seem to use as to what is an acceptable viewer drop-off from it's lead-in, but I'm not sure what the percentage was back then. A failure in 1974 would be a #1 hit today.)

5. If the Partridge Family was a success on Saturday nights with high enough ratings to keep it going, they would have replaced David Cassidy to see if the show would have worked without him. Would it have worked? My gut says no, but they would have given it a shot. Sorry, I don't buy the notion that Wesley Eure is full of shit simply because you never heard of him and/or never read it in Tiger Beat magazine. Lots of casting decisions are made without a press release going out. Those announcements wouldn't even be written until the series was picked up. The producers knew David Cassidy was leaving so it would make perfect sense that they would be exploring their options in the event the series sustained it's ratings. It did not, so the point is moot. I guess I don't understand why it's so hard to believe that they would have explored their options and cast someone else, contingent on the series getting a fifth season pick-up.

Last, I have a copy of David Cassidy's renegotiated contract -- somewhere -- I need to locate it. It was signed, coincidently, on his birthday -- April 12th. If I recall correctly, his salary went from $600 a week to $6,000 plus a cut of the profits, merchandising and spin-offs. (He owned a piece of "Getting Together.") Shirley's salary would have been bumped accordingly. The music was an added expense, so it wasn't a cheap show to produce. It was, in fact, expensive for it's time. With record sales in decline, I assume there was less money coming in to support new recordings, etc. Also, if I remember correctly -- (it's been so long since I had the inclination to look at this stuff) -- David Cassidy was actually supposed to leave after Season Three but agreed to come back for an abbreviated number of episodes in Season Four, then agreeing to stay the entire season. So, the producers knew this was coming for quite some time. It would have made sense that they would have at least thought about continuing without David Cassidy. OR, even they realized that there was no PF without DC, and this could be yet another reason why Bob Claver knew the series was winding down during Season Three. But, just because Bob Claver knew the series was winding down, whether it be financially, creatively, whatever, it doesn't mean the network wouldn't have milked it dry. Very Happy

Hi Scott, I do understand that ABC was trying to make money on The Partridge Family. I do not mean ABC moved it to Saturdays as an excuse to cancell it. Rather, they felt it was strong enough to survive, whereas other shows would not in that time slot, and they did not want to "sacrifice" a show they planned to renew for another year. You bring up several interesting points as to why Bob Claver felt the show was showing it's age in the third season, that it was not the ratings but the declining record sales, etc that he may have had in mind when he said that. This makes sense to me.
Yes, someone at ABC must have thought it a good idea to move the PF to Saturdays as a counter programing decision. It was dumb, a lot of teenagers went out on dates Saturday nights and would not stay home to watch DC if they had real boyfriends to go out with. Also, there were only 1 or 2 TV sets in the average household back then. With half the available audience watching AITF it severely limited the available audience left for ABC and NBC. "Emergency" had the advantage of being an hour long show and it picked up viewers in its second half after AITF was over-that improved its average rating. That was a very difficult time period for ABC- for several years nothing they put on at that time opposite AITF lasted past half season so credit is due The PF for having a large enough audience to last the entire season. I agree that if the ratings for season 4 were good ABC would have renewed it for another year. But I don't believe it would have remained popular without David Cassidy.
It is interesting that you mention that ABC ruined their entire Friday night programing schedule by moving the PF to Saturdays, as the other shows ended up being cancelled as well. The PF was the only Friday night show that ABC had on that regularly made the top twenty. It was a dumb move.
I have long felt it is unfair that programs with audience levels of 10-15 million viewers did not survive past 13 episodes in the 70's and 80's and yet today shows with those audience levels are considered hits and can run for many years. Audience levels for most shows on today cannot compare to those of the top shows in the 70's and 80's. If you consider the ratings in the late 80's and 90's you can see a rapid decline taking place in the major networks top shows ratings-before all the cable networks sprang up. People were just not attracted to the shows the networks were airing at that time-and it just continued to get worse. The PF had over 15 million viewers during its 4th season, yet ended up in the bottom ten. Yet today, a show with 15 million viewers would often make the top ten and be considered a big hit.
I understand that ABC would have considered options regarding casting someone else if they were planning to renew the PF after David left. The information I was reading about the PF was not coming just from Tiger Beat magazine (lol!) but from articles in newspapers and other magazines. You mention that not all casting decisions get media attention, but considering how popular DC was at the time and what a big impact his leaving would have on the show I would have expected there to be media attention on plans to replace him with someone else-I never read any or heard of any which is why I am suspicious of Wesley or other actor's claims that they now make- that they were going to replace DC on the Partridge Family. Just wishful thinking on their part. Wesley also claimed he was supposed to be Gopher on "Love Boat" - I have difficulty in believing his claims.
I believe Screen Gems felt that with David leaving, the show would be ending, and as you say, Bob Claver may have had this in mind too. It would be interesting to see what David's contract said. I hope you will share that information if you can find it.
Thank you for the information you have provided in your reply Scott. I hope we understand each other better now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scott
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 3962
Location: San Pueblo, CA

PostPosted: Fri Jul 08, 2011 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had a nice conversation with Wesley Eure this afternoon, where he detailed his experience of auditioning and being cast as David Cassidy's replacement in "The Partridge Family." When I have a chance, I'll try and create a new page for the interview in "People and Places" section. Very Happy

One mystery that's been solved is the timeline. Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
irving
Tracy's Sitter
Tracy's Sitter


Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Posts: 59
Location: New Jersey, USA

PostPosted: Fri Jul 08, 2011 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That will be interesting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scott
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 3962
Location: San Pueblo, CA

PostPosted: Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sarcasm duly noted. Wink

I'm not trying to convince you -- I researched it for other website-related reasons. It rare to find out new information (at least new to me) so when I do it's always a treat.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
KathySTL
Official Partridge-in-Training
Official Partridge-in-Training


Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 843
Location: St. Louis, MO

PostPosted: Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I will read it when it's posted.

Until this board I had never heard that any replacements for David Cassidy were ever sought, however, I am not surprised.
Every network show that I have ever heard that was a hit has always tried to keep going when an actor leaves.

As I recall, Charlie's Angels replaced all the girls except Jaclyn Smith before its run ended. Streets of San Francisco replaced Michael Douglas with Richard Hatch.
Bonanza even had Mitch Vogel to come in when Dan Blocker died. ( didn't keep the success going, Hoss's Stetson was too big to fill Smile)

Currently, of course, Two and a Half Men just replaces Charlie Sheen with Ashton Kutcher.
_________________
Kathy in St. Louis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Partridge Family Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Talk About The Show! All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


"gethappy" phpBB template © 2005 www.cmongethappy.com
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group