Originally posted by ZZZ: If TV was all on demand, and you could only choose one, would you really choose some reality show that you're only half-watching while doing something else?
On the other hand, Biggest Loser has to be approaching zero $ per episode in terms of costs (given the product placements likely pay for the production costs). So, ever dollar of 'On Demand' income wopuld be profit. Meanwhile, Jericho doesn't have enough fans that would pay the 'On Demand' fee for it to make back its cost to produce.
Well, technically all broadcast TV cost $0 when you take into account it is ad supported. There's No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. You're still paying indirectly. But if the Biggest Loser actually uses product placement, and people are willing to tolerate that, that just feeds my argument that most people watching it aren't really watching it... They just have the TV on while doing other things and are watching 5 minutes here and there.
Anyway, the fundamental point which I was making in my original post, and which I reiterate here, is that people actually like Jericho and other scripted shows more than reality, it's just that they're harder to make money from them given that so many don't watch live network TV anymore. The good shows suffer because people don't want to be interrupted and so will record it or watch it on the Interenet or buy the DVD.
Even when you just change the method of delivery from broadcast to Internet, Jericho goes from last to first in the ratings. That's an amazing difference. Bare in mind, you're still getting it free. It's just slightly more difficult than turning on the TV. Now think if there was a venue where you could actually pay directly. Just the people sending peanuts could have paid for the show.
Originally posted by ZZZ: Anyway, the fundamental point which I was making in my original post, and which I reiterate here, is that people actually like Jericho and other scripted shows more than reality,
You are fundamentally wrong as shown by the TV ratings.
quote:
it's just that they're harder to make money from them given that so many don't watch live network TV anymore. The good shows suffer because people don't want to be interrupted and so will record it or watch it on the Interenet or buy the DVD.
Feel free to add up all the different ways of viewing Jericho and you still don't have a very sizeable audience. Jericho just isn't very popular.
quote:
Even when you just change the method of delivery from broadcast to Internet, Jericho goes from last to first in the ratings.
What method of measurement are you using for this 'insight'? It isn't DVR data since shows like Biggest Loser have more DVR viewers than Jericho. Do you have accurate data on internet viewing of all the shows or just data from apoint source like i-tunes?
quote:
Now think if there was a venue where you could actually pay directly. Just the people sending peanuts could have paid for the show.
If each episode cost $1,000,000 would the 40,000 that sent peanuts really be willing to pay $25 per episode?
Originally posted by ZZZ: Anyway, the fundamental point which I was making in my original post, and which I reiterate here, is that people actually like Jericho and other scripted shows more than reality,
You are fundamentally wrong as shown by the TV ratings.
quote:
it's just that they're harder to make money from them given that so many don't watch live network TV anymore. The good shows suffer because people don't want to be interrupted and so will record it or watch it on the Interenet or buy the DVD.
Feel free to add up all the different ways of viewing Jericho and you still don't have a very sizeable audience. Jericho just isn't very popular.
quote:
Even when you just change the method of delivery from broadcast to Internet, Jericho goes from last to first in the ratings.
What method of measurement are you using for this 'insight'? It isn't DVR data since shows like Biggest Loser have more DVR viewers than Jericho. Do you have accurate data on internet viewing of all the shows or just data from apoint source like i-tunes?
quote:
Now think if there was a venue where you could actually pay directly. Just the people sending peanuts could have paid for the show.
If each episode cost $1,000,000 would the 40,000 that sent peanuts really be willing to pay $25 per episode?
Posts: 176 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: 03 January 2008
Originally posted by ZZZ: Anyway, the fundamental point which I was making in my original post, and which I reiterate here, is that people actually like Jericho and other scripted shows more than reality,
You are fundamentally wrong as shown by the TV ratings.
quote:
it's just that they're harder to make money from them given that so many don't watch live network TV anymore. The good shows suffer because people don't want to be interrupted and so will record it or watch it on the Interenet or buy the DVD.
Feel free to add up all the different ways of viewing Jericho and you still don't have a very sizeable audience. Jericho just isn't very popular.
quote:
Even when you just change the method of delivery from broadcast to Internet, Jericho goes from last to first in the ratings.
What method of measurement are you using for this 'insight'? It isn't DVR data since shows like Biggest Loser have more DVR viewers than Jericho. Do you have accurate data on internet viewing of all the shows or just data from apoint source like i-tunes?
quote:
Now think if there was a venue where you could actually pay directly. Just the people sending peanuts could have paid for the show.
If each episode cost $1,000,000 would the 40,000 that sent peanuts really be willing to pay $25 per episode?
I wasn't going by the ratings. That was the whole point. I was going by streaming and DVD sales. It would only cost 15 cents for each person who watched the show to pay for it. So, as I said, it's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of venue. There's just no way to do that currently. Not many people use VOD. I know Jericho is not as popular as American Idol. But Jericho at the theaters would kill American Idol. Do you understand now?
Originally posted by ZZZ: I wasn't going by the ratings. That was the whole point. I was going by streaming and DVD sales. It would only cost 15 cents for each person who watched the show to pay for it. So, as I said, it's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of venue. There's just no way to do that currently. Not many people use VOD.
I see. So, Jericho would be 'popular' in an imaginary world where millions of people were willing to pay to stream it over the internet However, since that world doesn't actually exist, you were just speculating that people would be more willing ot pay for less popular shows.
quote:
I know Jericho is not as popular as American Idol. But Jericho at the theaters would kill American Idol. Do you understand now?
I understand that Jericho would be a box office bomb if it were in the theater.
Originally posted by vlis: why is that Marc? Most of the people here commented that they liked what they saw. Who knows, maybe it will get some LOST pre-tune in tonite
If nothing else, it is great counterprogramming for the CBS basketball marathon and keeps the timeslot warm for ABC's female skew.
Speaking of ABC's female skew, according to this Hollywood Reporter Article, ABC was unsuccessful in convincing Lifetime network to take over October Road or Men in Trees.
Originally posted by vlis: why is that Marc? Most of the people here commented that they liked what they saw. Who knows, maybe it will get some LOST pre-tune in tonite
If nothing else, it is great counterprogramming for the CBS basketball marathon and keeps the timeslot warm for ABC's female skew.
Speaking of ABC's female skew, according to this Hollywood Reporter Article, ABC was unsuccessful in convincing Lifetime network to take over October Road or Men in Trees.
Don't you think Miss Guided will take a hit against DOND?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Zedman2,
Won't people just watch online? I know I would instead of waiting for the dumb recap special.
Even though online viewing is growing, especially for ABC shows, it's still a small percentage of the overall audience. I think many people will take the opportunity to watch the recap show, though plenty will catch it online as well.
Wow, we were just talking about such a move on here. This makes sense.
Actually what would have made more sense would have been to just cancel CL. If the numbers were as weak as they were on a Monday, just wait what the show pulls in on a Friday.
Commander in chief is a prime example of a network that really wants to kill a show when they want to. They banish it to Thursdays, pre-grey's anatomy on Thursdays and say its the ratings. If they wanted to bring back a show, it can -- it brought back ratings dud -- Notes from the underbelly for some odd reason. There is nothing like network support. Some shows and some networks will be willing to let a show grow and this was a clear example that they really didn't want to deal with this show, even though it could have easily rebounded.
quote:
Originally posted by Chimera:
quote:
Originally posted by mushu_jj:
quote:
Originally posted by robert:
quote:
Originally posted by TV-aholic: CBS should have just picked up Commander in Chief last year.
quote:
Originally posted by robert: Here comes CBS with another procedural
CIC was one of the worst shows i've ever tried to watch
The middle 10 episodes were bad. The beginning and ending episodes were great. I'm assuming you saw the middle episodes unless you have some reason for hating what was a really great concept, just not a very well executed plan. CiC is a great example of what happens when chimps are in charge of your network.
I would have to agree that the downfall of Commander in Chief, from most-watched new show to getting cancelled in the span of a few months was the most blatant example of ABC execs tinkering too much with a show. They fired its creator and director because he would occasionally turn in shows late, and the result was the show lost its vision and direction: the shows were on time, but weren't nearly as good. Then they moved it, then burned it off in the summer. Quite a downfall for a show that premiered with over 16 million viewers in a timeslot (Tuesdays @ 9pm) that would have made a perfect companion for the DWTS: Results show -- a very similar demographic.
Wow, we were just talking about such a move on here. This makes sense.
Actually what would have made more sense would have been to just cancel CL. If the numbers were as weak as they were on a Monday, just wait what the show pulls in on a Friday.
Not only is it on Friday, but it has Jezebel James as a lead-in...
