Page
1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15
Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by lopez: quote: Originally posted by AmericanGothic: quote:
What kind of programming would be developed then?
Infomercials
Ugh. Why can't the old WB exec's. program the night? lol. That would be a night I would actually watch. |
| |
|
|
quote:
This will likely lead to affiliate defections from The CW's Sunday from stations or station groups that feel they have better alternatives than the undetermined-as-of-yet outsourced product. Wouldn't it be a real slap in the face if the out-sourcers came up with programming that beat The CW on weeknights? Does anybody know whether the two Easyview hours (5-7 pm on Sunday) have also been outsourced? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by AmericanGothic: quote: Originally posted by lopez: quote: Originally posted by AmericanGothic: quote:
What kind of programming would be developed then?
Infomercials
Ugh. Why can't the old WB exec's. program the night? lol. That would be a night I would actually watch.
Wouldn't it be a hoot if they outsourced it to the upcoming new website wb.com, who then proceeded to program the night with encores and a few new originals of all the Warner Television series Ms. Ostroff cancelled before their time was up: 7:00 pm Everwood 8:00 pm Gilmore Girls 9:00 pm Veronica Mars Even as just encores, the above line-up would out-rate the current line-up skedded by The CW. |
| |
|
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Brent88: quote:
LOL! How sad.
My favorite part of that article is where they say, "the CW was not available for comment." This is probably because the budget has been cut so low that the only phone to the CW is the one connected to the answering machine at Dawn Ostroff's house.  Come to think of it, maybe they are runing the entire network out of her garage?  |
| |
|
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Hawk-eye: quote: Originally posted by Brent88: quote:
LOL! How sad.
My favorite part of that article is where they say, "the CW was not available for comment." This is probably because the budget has been cut so low that the only phone to the CW is the one connected to the answering machine at Dawn Ostroff's house. Come to think of it, maybe they are runing the entire network out of her garage?
ROFL! This is the beginning of the end of The CW I think. |
| |
|
|
|
quote: Originally posted by mushu_jj: quote: Originally posted by Zedman2:
Yet ES didn't have the leadin support the WMC had yesterday. In fact for it's season finale, ES grew from its leadin. I don't believe WMC could have done the same.
While ES didn't do amazingly well behind Housewives, it showed it has a lot more demo power than WMC and that's why it will return and not WMC, which according to some, has not been near as good since the showrunners were replaced. I just think that's a flawed series anymore that can't work during the week as a fill in, which is quite possibly what ABC wanted it for as a repeater. They can probably pull that 1.8 demo on Friday with something cheaper (most likely reality or some poor comedy that will get paired with Jim and Scrubs next year).
ES without a lead-in is dead, WMC doesn't need a lead-in to pull 1.8-2 in demos and 8 millions in viewers. Once again i'll be proved right next season. Caceling WMC and renweing WMC is a huge mistake |
| |
|
|
|
I feel sorry for CW only beacauase is the "legal" follwer of WB, my favourite network for many years. But for other than that i'm actually happy
Let's bring WB back (Ostroff-free of course)
|
| |
|
|
|
quote:
As per usual, the posters here demonstrate an amazing lack of thinking ability when it comes to CW. This arrangement to sell off Sunday is almost exactly what they were doing with Friday/Smackdown. How many times has it been explained to all of you that Smackdown wasn't generating any significant revenue because CW licensed Smackdown for a very low rate and Smackdown was in charge of all of the advertising sales for the night (with Smackdown keeping the ad revenue they brought in)? The reason that Smackdown is gone from CW is that Smackdown wanted to end that ad sales arrangement, get a bigger license fee from CW, and leave CW with all the cost/difficulty of selling ad time for the 2-hour wrestling show. CW didn't want to pay the higher licensing fee. CW didn't want to have to take on all the overhead/work of selling 2 additional hours of ad time per week. CW recognized that if they were going to take on that extra cost/work, they needed to find programming that would actually be useful to their network. So, non-significant-revenue generating Smackdown was cut loose. This new plan for Sunday programming sounds like the CW is going to go out and find some new group to do the same thing that Smackdown did with Fridays. The new group will take on the marketing/ad sales so CW doesn't have to take on that overhead. The hope, of course, is that the new group will program something more useful to the network audience than what Smackdown delivered. I don't think it is a 'given' that the timeslot will be filled with infomercials. It is just as likely that it will be filled by some cable outlet buying up the time and airing some of their syndicated programming or some movie studio buying up the time to air some of their catalog. All in all, this is a better idea than CW slapping out a 'movie night' with the Warner Bros. leftovers (the good Warner stuff is already going to TNT/TBS) and a much better idea than turning the night over to the local affiliates. |
| |
|
|
|
CBS must be doing something right. this Adage Article quotes estimated Upfront sales for the networks in 2008-2009. Despite CBS taking a much bigger than average ratings decline over the last year, their ad sales are not expected to drop more than the other main networks. So, what keeps CBS' revenue steady even when their ratings decline? My best guess is that advertisers still 'play the odds' and that they feel CBS is still a more stable bet than ABC/NBC/FOX. |
| |
|
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Obveeus: quote:
As per usual, the posters here demonstrate an amazing lack of thinking ability when it comes to CW. This arrangement to sell off Sunday is almost exactly what they were doing with Friday/Smackdown. How many times has it been explained to all of you that Smackdown wasn't generating any significant revenue because CW licensed Smackdown for a very low rate and Smackdown was in charge of all of the advertising sales for the night (with Smackdown keeping the ad revenue they brought in)? The reason that Smackdown is gone from CW is that Smackdown wanted to end that ad sales arrangement, get a bigger license fee from CW, and leave CW with all the cost/difficulty of selling ad time for the 2-hour wrestling show. CW didn't want to pay the higher licensing fee. CW didn't want to have to take on all the overhead/work of selling 2 additional hours of ad time per week. CW recognized that if they were going to take on that extra cost/work, they needed to find programming that would actually be useful to their network. So, non-significant-revenue generating Smackdown was cut loose. This new plan for Sunday programming sounds like the CW is going to go out and find some new group to do the same thing that Smackdown did with Fridays. The new group will take on the marketing/ad sales so CW doesn't have to take on that overhead. The hope, of course, is that the new group will program something more useful to the network audience than what Smackdown delivered. I don't think it is a 'given' that the timeslot will be filled with infomercials. It is just as likely that it will be filled by some cable outlet buying up the time and airing some of their syndicated programming or some movie studio buying up the time to air some of their catalog. All in all, this is a better idea than CW slapping out a 'movie night' with the Warner Bros. leftovers (the good Warner stuff is already going to TNT/TBS) and a much better idea than turning the night over to the local affiliates.
Thank you for explaining the situation to us "the stupid people". CW is doing great and it's giving up its Sunday programming exactly beacuase it's doing so great |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by robert:
tvbythenumbers reports that in the 8pm hour last night UNIVISION was Number 1 among all networks in the 18-34 demos. Once again i don't understand why Univision is so left out across the mainstream media, including here on this forum.
There was an article last year (I forget the source now. Could be broadcastingcable.com) That featured the unknown from advertisers about the Univision ratings. I think the added element of the viewers being 1st language spanish and, mostly, of hispanic culture, throws a curveball in to a generalized demographic. I believe they see it, as best they can, as a seperate demo, so to speak. Is a 25 year old, born and raised in the Americna culture, the same consumer as a 25 year old hispanic immagant? That is the question they are stuggling with.
|
| |
| Posts: 16524 | Location: Indiana | Registered: 20 September 2006 | |
|
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Justin:
Off topic, but you know what I find sad and pathetic? NBC's promotion for their 7 year old show's network finale is a 3 second promotion, saying "then the final episode of Scrubs."
Yet 30 Rock gets 30 second promotions and has worse numbers than Scrubs? At least everyone knows Scrubs, and at least Scrubs used to pull in 15 million viewers. If NBC would have buzzed this show and its finale, I'm sure ratings would have been better, but apparently, it's dirt to NBC.
I'm almost ready to boycott this dammed network.
Why would NBC give some promotion and "buzz" to Scrubs? It is leaving for a final season on ABC next year, against NBC wishes.
|
| |
| Posts: 634 | Location: NYC | Registered: 02 November 2007 | |
|
|
|
quote: Originally posted by TV-aholic: quote: Originally posted by robert:
tvbythenumbers reports that in the 8pm hour last night UNIVISION was Number 1 among all networks in the 18-34 demos. Once again i don't understand why Univision is so left out across the mainstream media, including here on this forum.
There was an article last year (I forget the source now. Could be broadcastingcable.com) That featured the unknown from advertisers about the Univision ratings. I think the added element of the viewers being 1st language spanish and, mostly, of hispanic culture, throws a curveball in to a generalized demographic. I believe they see it, as best they can, as a seperate demo, so to speak. Is a 25 year old, born and raised in the Americna culture, the same consumer as a 25 year old hispanic immagant? That is the question they are stuggling with.
I don't care beacause this is not a forum for advirtisers, or it is? A 25 years old hispanic is just as "human" as a 25 year old african american or a 25 years old white american. And the fact that at 8pm most of the 18-34 years old individuals were watching UNIVISION is remarkable |
| |
|
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
