DSM was a crashing bore, mushu. And badly timed, to boot. No, it wasn't scheduling that bollixed ABC's efforts--it was development. They have not made even a POTENTIAL big hit since 2005. They have spent a fortune on shows nobody will ever watch again.
What was going on back in 2004? Were they just lucky, or did some of their development talent take a hike to cable?
With CBS, it's more about the endgame. CBS has had a few utility players to full fledged players each development season that they've been able to schedule for multiple seasons. Many of which made enough episodes for syndication. And they are in position to toss shows like Without A Trace, The Unit, and now Numbers aside once they reach syndication because of expense. ABC has had to trash almost everything they've programmed for the last few years. Most bomb that they have to get trashed within 13 episodes or 18 episodes. Their syndication track record isn't great. And ABC is keeping or has kept shows like Ugly Betty, Scrubs, and According to Jim for syndication despite the fact that they bring down their average. They don't have the luxury of just tossing them aside because whatever they program there will likely bomb and they will lose out on the syndication money. Out of the two networks, I'd say CBS is the clear winner over ABC.
quote:
Originally posted by TV-aholic: With a few exceptions, CBS has not been about the BIG massive numbers. They are about consistent numbers each night, in each time slot.
To be fair, for the first few years after 2004, they needed more utility players than big game shows. DSM was really heating up creatively in season 1 and that extended into season 2. Why it couldn't be tried behind Desperate Housewives was a real mystery to me. That season they were hopeful for PP to become a big hit, but creatively it wasn't there at first. Last season they didn't launch anything that even looked monster hit-like. Recall however, in 2004 that ABC was actual developed by different executives who had been brought in under terrible situations and really did a good job at the time of stabilizing the network.
quote:
Originally posted by pisher: DSM was a crashing bore, mushu. And badly timed, to boot. No, it wasn't scheduling that bollixed ABC's efforts--it was development. They have not made even a POTENTIAL big hit since 2005. They have spent a fortune on shows nobody will ever watch again.
What was going on back in 2004? Were they just lucky, or did some of their development talent take a hike to cable?
1) My last episode of DSM got deleted from the DVR, so I need X to assign me another series episode to watch.
2) ABC, IMO, doesn't seem to know what it wants to be. It let MNF go to ESPN so it could concentrate more on the Female demos, but yet it still launches series like V, Life On Mars, Defying Gravity, The Goode Family, CAVEMEN.
quote:
Originally posted by mushu_jj: The copycats save for PP haven't worked all that well for them. See the likes of Dirty Sexy Money (excellent program by the way- TV-aholic needs to post his last critique), Eli Stone, October Road, Men in Trees, etc. For the record though, ABC botched almost all of these programs and their time slots.
quote:
Originally posted by WlcmZapataTexas: That's exactly why ABC needs to push that. It's a concept that fits ABC's profile extremely well and is instantly marketable. It pushes back. After all, wasn't Private Practice a Grey's copycat at one point.
quote:
Originally posted by mushu_jj: The Deep End sounds like another Greys copycat. We don't need another one of those.
Good point. CBS looks at it from a different angle than ABC most of the time. Still, aside from now BBT and strangely enough, NCIS:Mothership, CBS hasn't really developed any true demo players.
quote:
Originally posted by WlcmZapataTexas: With CBS, it's more about the endgame. CBS has had a few utility players to full fledged players each development season that they've been able to schedule for multiple seasons. Many of which made enough episodes for syndication. And they are in position to toss shows like Without A Trace, The Unit, and now Numbers aside once they reach syndication because of expense. ABC has had to trash almost everything they've programmed for the last few years. Most bomb that they have to get trashed within 13 episodes or 18 episodes. Their syndication track record isn't great. And ABC is keeping or has kept shows like Ugly Betty, Scrubs, and According to Jim for syndication despite the fact that they bring down their average. They don't have the luxury of just tossing them aside because whatever they program there will likely bomb and they will lose out on the syndication money. Out of the two networks, I'd say CBS is the clear winner over ABC.
quote:
Originally posted by TV-aholic: With a few exceptions, CBS has not been about the BIG massive numbers. They are about consistent numbers each night, in each time slot.
Originally posted by mushu_jj: To be fair, for the first few years after 2004, they needed more utility players than big game shows. DSM was really heating up creatively in season 1 and that extended into season 2. Why it couldn't be tried behind Desperate Housewives was a real mystery to me. That season they were hopeful for PP to become a big hit, but creatively it wasn't there at first. Last season they didn't launch anything that even looked monster hit-like. Recall however, in 2004 that ABC was actual developed by different executives who had been brought in under terrible situations and really did a good job at the time of stabilizing the network.
quote:
Originally posted by pisher: DSM was a crashing bore, mushu. And badly timed, to boot. No, it wasn't scheduling that bollixed ABC's efforts--it was development. They have not made even a POTENTIAL big hit since 2005. They have spent a fortune on shows nobody will ever watch again.
What was going on back in 2004? Were they just lucky, or did some of their development talent take a hike to cable?
One thing to keep in mind about TV in general is that women watch more than men (at least on broadcast). Even the big CBS players skew more female than male. Someone posted this not too long ago (spotupj?). That said, CBS has done a much better job of balancing gender. ABC certainly needs the big female hits and having lots of female viewers is a good idea. However, they do need male hits too. I would guess V has lots of female viewers. LOM was simply too niche in general. Defying Gravity was utter crap- a half ass attempt at Greys in space. The Goode Family was burn off from day one.
quote:
Originally posted by TV-aholic: 1) My last episode of DSM got deleted from the DVR, so I need X to assign me another series episode to watch.
2) ABC, IMO, doesn't seem to know what it wants to be. It let MNF go to ESPN so it could concentrate more on the Female demos, but yet it still launches series like V, Life On Mars, Defying Gravity, The Goode Family, CAVEMEN.
quote:
Originally posted by mushu_jj: The copycats save for PP haven't worked all that well for them. See the likes of Dirty Sexy Money (excellent program by the way- TV-aholic needs to post his last critique), Eli Stone, October Road, Men in Trees, etc. For the record though, ABC botched almost all of these programs and their time slots.
quote:
Originally posted by WlcmZapataTexas: That's exactly why ABC needs to push that. It's a concept that fits ABC's profile extremely well and is instantly marketable. It pushes back. After all, wasn't Private Practice a Grey's copycat at one point.
quote:
Originally posted by mushu_jj: The Deep End sounds like another Greys copycat. We don't need another one of those.
To add to my point: ABC does have promotional vehicles for males. Its called Saturday College Football and ESPN. The large premieres for Lost are a good example of this and the success of comedy Wednesday so far. I also think this audience helped launch V and FF, even if both programs fizzle out. The problem has been the actual shows themselves.
Most of the CBS series are right near or above their weekly average, which is usually good enough to be on top for most week this fall.
quote:
Originally posted by mushu_jj: Good point. CBS looks at it from a different angle than ABC most of the time. Still, aside from now BBT and strangely enough, NCIS:Mothership, CBS hasn't really developed any true demo players.
quote:
Originally posted by WlcmZapataTexas: With CBS, it's more about the endgame. CBS has had a few utility players to full fledged players each development season that they've been able to schedule for multiple seasons. Many of which made enough episodes for syndication. And they are in position to toss shows like Without A Trace, The Unit, and now Numbers aside once they reach syndication because of expense. ABC has had to trash almost everything they've programmed for the last few years. Most bomb that they have to get trashed within 13 episodes or 18 episodes. Their syndication track record isn't great. And ABC is keeping or has kept shows like Ugly Betty, Scrubs, and According to Jim for syndication despite the fact that they bring down their average. They don't have the luxury of just tossing them aside because whatever they program there will likely bomb and they will lose out on the syndication money. Out of the two networks, I'd say CBS is the clear winner over ABC.
quote:
Originally posted by TV-aholic: With a few exceptions, CBS has not been about the BIG massive numbers. They are about consistent numbers each night, in each time slot.
To add to my point: ABC does have promotional vehicles for males. Its called Saturday College Football and ESPN. The large premieres for Lost are a good example of this and the success of comedy Wednesday so far. I also think this audience helped launch V and FF, even if both programs fizzle out. The problem has been the actual shows themselves.
You didn't seem to see any problem with V, the day after it premiered. But yeah, the problem is the shows. Agreed. What I said. Like a bajillion times already.
Originally posted by TV-aholic: Most of the CBS series are right near or above their weekly average, which is usually good enough to be on top for most week this fall.
Actually, Fox has had the best fall thanks to solid demos on Sundays, Mondays, and Wednesdays and improvement on Thursday compared to last fall (even if the night is still weak). CBS and ABC are usually neck and neck. What would help both is if they would actually address their weak spots instead of just turning their head on those nights. (CBS Sunday and ABC's various holes on Tue, Wed, and Fri)
Originally posted by mushu_jj: Most of the programs you mentioned were never massive demo players. Most were decent time period players and some were simply time period hits (see Shark, Still Standing). I can't name a big demo hit player that's been established in the past few years. House is the last one to come to mind.
To add to my point: ABC does have promotional vehicles for males. Its called Saturday College Football and ESPN. The large premieres for Lost are a good example of this and the success of comedy Wednesday so far. I also think this audience helped launch V and FF, even if both programs fizzle out. The problem has been the actual shows themselves.
You didn't seem to see any problem with V, the day after it premiered. But yeah, the problem is the shows. Agreed. What I said. Like a bajillion times already.
You just proved my point. ABC used its promotional properties to launch V. It launched well. Subsequent viewership depends on shows themselves. You know, like how Castle has developed a stable audience of its own. Gotcha!
Originally posted by mushu_jj: Most of the programs you mentioned were never massive demo players. Most were decent time period players and some were simply time period hits (see Shark, Still Standing). I can't name a big demo hit player that's been established in the past few years. House is the last one to come to mind.
Isn't BBT's demo over 5 now?
Notice I used the word "most" and it took the placement behind 2.5 Men to make BBT a huge hit.
