Originally posted by robert: FOX must be drugged or something if they want to renew SCC which was the bomb of the season alongside VL
What? Are you the one on drugs? Yes the show is expensive. Yes it lost some viewers along the way. In no way is it Viva Laughlin. Fox likes it and that's all that matters. The people on drugs are those at ABC who are returning disasters in Jim and Scrubs, two shows that deserved to die 2 years ago.
ABC is also giving DIRTY SEXY MONEY-the worst show of the new season a relaunch this fall.
DSM is also a mystery to me. If ES remains at last 2-3 weeks levels and gets canceled while DSM got renwed i'll be very mad
Originally posted by TV-aholic: But at CBS, you can have good demo numbers AND... good total viewer numbers.
I agree ... I just find Network Executives funny. No way does Moonves make this comment when CBS is leading in the demos as they were for part of last season. Sort of like how the MLB owners only found outrage with steroids after they made millions over the Homerun record's chasers.
Originally posted by TV-aholic: Really? Was it really a bomb???
It did averge over 8 million viewers and over a 3.0 in the demo.
quote:
Originally posted by robert: FOX must be drugged or something if they want to renew SCC which was the bomb of the season alongside VL
As i said before, from a 40 million lead-in to get in just 7 weeks to 8 million is a bomb. If SCC would've been treated like Canterbury and it would've got 8 million thatn i would've agreed with those saying it's a success
So, the real numbers don't matter, its how it got there that does matter?
No one is saying T:SCC is a hit or anything. It did well enough to get a second look and has the potential to grow.
I could easily name a dozen, or two, shows from this season that performed worse than T:SCC.
Originally posted by TV-aholic: But at CBS, you can have good demo numbers AND... good total viewer numbers.
I agree ... I just find Network Executives funny. No way does Moonves make this comment when CBS is leading in the demos as they were for part of last season. Sort of like how the MLB owners only found outrage with steroids after they made millions over the Homerun record's chasers.
Well said. Moonves is mainly saying this due to CBS's quite lousy performance as of late in the demo.
Originally posted by robert: FOX must be drugged or something if they want to renew SCC which was the bomb of the season alongside VL
What? Are you the one on drugs? Yes the show is expensive. Yes it lost some viewers along the way. In no way is it Viva Laughlin. Fox likes it and that's all that matters. The people on drugs are those at ABC who are returning disasters in Jim and Scrubs, two shows that deserved to die 2 years ago.
ABC is also giving DIRTY SEXY MONEY-the worst show of the new season a relaunch this fall.
DSM is also a mystery to me. If ES remains at last 2-3 weeks levels and gets canceled while DSM got renwed i'll be very mad
I suppose you have somewhat of a point, but creatively DSM was on the up and up and its retention out of its lead in was still better than what Eli Stone is pulling out of Lost. And for the record, I like both shows.
Originally posted by TV-aholic: A quote from Leslie Moonves
I guess this means that CBS will continue to be out of touch with the viewers that advertisers are willing to pay the most for.
CBS doesn't mind that but you are. Strange.
Do you have stocks or something? Are you losing money?
Your understanding of the world is limited if you believe that only people who own stock in CBS would be able to figure out that CBS is going to make less money with old folks shows than with shows that appeal to an audience that advertisers are willing to pay for.
But what i don't get is why DO YOU care about how well CBS does with the advertisers? As far as i know CBS won't go bankrupt anytime soon. So why are you happier if CBS does better with younger audiences than with older audiences
I don't think Obveeus cares that much. S/he is just stating the truth that CBS won't make as much money and MONEY is what its all about.
I could easily name a dozen, or two, shows from this season that performed worse than T:SCC.
How many of them lost over half their premiere audience in the course of nine episodes, though? And how many cost as much?
FOX is falling prey to the good old Concorde Fallacy. They invested so much in this show, making and marketing it, that they can't just walk away. They have to throw good money after bad, and prove to themselves that it's a flop. And I could name you SCORES of previous instances of networks doing this--but the number of times it worked out well can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Thumb, you can sit this one out.
Originally posted by TV-aholic: A quote from Leslie Moonves
I guess this means that CBS will continue to be out of touch with the viewers that advertisers are willing to pay the most for.
CBS doesn't mind that but you are. Strange.
Do you have stocks or something? Are you losing money?
Your understanding of the world is limited if you believe that only people who own stock in CBS would be able to figure out that CBS is going to make less money with old folks shows than with shows that appeal to an audience that advertisers are willing to pay for.
But what i don't get is why DO YOU care about how well CBS does with the advertisers? As far as i know CBS won't go bankrupt anytime soon. So why are you happier if CBS does better with younger audiences than with older audiences
Ah, ok, I understand you now. You know that focusing on old people will reduce CBS's income and you don't care about that fact. Fine by me. I don't 'personally' care about it, either. I was just pointing out the truth that you now acknowledge: Moonves' belief system will lead CBS down a path towards less profitiability. I'm glad we agree.
I could easily name a dozen, or two, shows from this season that performed worse than T:SCC.
How many of them lost over half their premiere audience in the course of nine episodes, though? And how many cost as much?
FOX is falling prey to the good old Concorde Fallacy. They invested so much in this show, making and marketing it, that they can't just walk away. They have to throw good money after bad, and prove to themselves that it's a flop. And I could name you SCORES of previous instances of networks doing this--but the number of time it worked out well can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Thumb, you can sit this one out.
I find the renewal of SCC less mind boggling than renewals of According to Jim, Scubs, or ER, all of which should've ended 2 years ago when half of their original audiences were still watching and in the case of ER when at least one original cast member was still there. Instead they've all been drug on a leash behind the NBC and ABC bumpers hitting every pot hole on the way and sinking even lower. At least SCC has some creative places they can go. Is it a monster hit? No. Is it still a decent option for Fox to use with Prison Break on Mondays this fall? Yes. If it can't pull 8 million this fall, then I'd say cancel it.
Originally posted by TV-aholic: A quote from Leslie Moonves
I guess this means that CBS will continue to be out of touch with the viewers that advertisers are willing to pay the most for.
CBS doesn't mind that but you are. Strange.
Do you have stocks or something? Are you losing money?
Your understanding of the world is limited if you believe that only people who own stock in CBS would be able to figure out that CBS is going to make less money with old folks shows than with shows that appeal to an audience that advertisers are willing to pay for.
But what i don't get is why DO YOU care about how well CBS does with the advertisers? As far as i know CBS won't go bankrupt anytime soon. So why are you happier if CBS does better with younger audiences than with older audiences
Ah, ok, I understand you now. You know that focusing on old people will reduce CBS's income and you don't care about that fact. Fine by me. I don't 'personally' care about it, either. I was just pointing out the truth that you now acknowledge: Moonves' belief system will lead CBS down a path towards less profitiability. I'm glad we agree.
I think the overabundance of crime dramas that at first gave CBS all those younger viewers will eventually lead them back to being the "old" network. Many of them lost significant 18-49 numbers in the past few years while retaining the older viewers. Its not something advertisers like the look of. Granted some of it was due to DVRs but let's face it: these shows are on their downhill slide as are many shows on TV. Greys would be another example although they at least keep the majority of their viewers in the demo.
I wouldn't say that CBS is "Out of Touch" with the advertisers. This NY Times articel from last year places CBS on top going into this season ("CBS Leads in Ad Commitments for Fall Season")
I believe it was $2.5 billion in upfront money for this current season.
quote:
Originally posted by Obveeus:
quote:
Originally posted by TV-aholic: A quote from Leslie Moonves
I guess this means that CBS will continue to be out of touch with the viewers that advertisers are willing to pay the most for.
I find the renewal of SCC less mind boggling than renewals of According to Jim, Scubs, or ER, all of which should've ended 2 years ago when half of their original audiences were still watching and in the case of ER when at least one original cast member was still there.
All those renewals are mistakes, but the fact is that a longtime hit is effectively 'tenured' at a network, and there's a lot of resistance towards canceling it, even when it fades. According to Jim--well, okay, you got me there.
quote:
Instead they've all been drug on a leash behind the NBC and ABC bumpers hitting every pot hole on the way and sinking even lower. At least SCC has some creative places they can go.
That three movies and counting have already gone to, with bigger stars and better SFX. There is nothing remotely creative about SCC. It's a hackpiece with pretensions, is all.
quote:
Is it a monster hit? No.
And to be viable longterm, it needs to be. And never will be. And never could be.
quote:
Is it still a decent option for Fox to use with Prison Break on Mondays this fall?
Compared to what? Selling the airtime for infomercials? That might actually prove more profitable.
quote:
Yes. If it can't pull 8 million this fall, then I'd say cancel it.
If it only pulls 8 million, the demo better go up above 4.0, but fast.
It'll go right on falling. And its fans will go right on spinning.
Originally posted by TV-aholic: Really? Was it really a bomb???
It did averge over 8 million viewers and over a 3.0 in the demo.
quote:
Originally posted by robert: FOX must be drugged or something if they want to renew SCC which was the bomb of the season alongside VL
As i said before, from a 40 million lead-in to get in just 7 weeks to 8 million is a bomb. If SCC would've been treated like Canterbury and it would've got 8 million thatn i would've agreed with those saying it's a success
So, the real numbers don't matter, its how it got there that does matter?
No one is saying T:SCC is a hit or anything. It did well enough to get a second look and has the potential to grow.
I could easily name a dozen, or two, shows from this season that performed worse than T:SCC.
Of course that counts. Look at SW. It's pretty much dead without DWTS. Or look at B&S, is doing very bad without DH
Originally posted by mushu_jj: I think the overabundance of crime dramas that at first gave CBS all those younger viewers will eventually lead them back to being the "old" network. Many of them lost significant 18-49 numbers in the past few years while retaining the older viewers. Its not something advertisers like the look of. Granted some of it was due to DVRs but let's face it: these shows are on their downhill slide as are many shows on TV. Greys would be another example although they at least keep the majority of their viewers in the demo.
An yet, they still finished 2nd, to FOX, last year in the Demo and should be able to repeat that again this year.
IIRC, CBS is only 0.1 ratings point both ABC and NBC in the "Season To Date" demo ratings. Getting all their shows up and running far ahead of the other nets will push them quickly infront of the those two.
