Author Topic: The Rich List gone (Read 14753 times)

Patrick S · « **Reply #30 on:** November 05, 2006, 11:45:33 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'137069\' date=\'Nov 5 2006, 11:30 PM\']

And I'm worrying about you if you're feeling that strongly about eight or so button presses.
[/quote]

Geez. Apparently the art of a metaphoric expression is lost on you. Let me bring down the level of figurative language to the most basic, pedestrian, literal one possible:

It's too bad that the entire run of The Rich List ended up being one episode.

Does that make sense to you?

clemon79 · « **Reply #31 on:** November 05, 2006, 11:55:26 PM »

[quote name=\'Patrick S\' post=\'137072\' date=\'Nov 5 2006, 08:45 PM\']
It's too bad that the entire run of The Rich List ended up being one episode.
Does that make sense to you?
[/quote]
Yes, that makes much more sense, and I agree it's too bad, but for me it's because one episode was too many.

Terry K · « **Reply #32 on:** November 06, 2006, 05:05:10 AM »

There is always FOX reality channel to burn them off.

Clay Zambo · « **Reply #33 on:** November 06, 2006, 07:28:15 AM »

[quote name=\'Terry K\' post=\'137090\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 05:05 AM\']
There is always FOX reality channel to burn them off.
[/quote]

True, and a nice idea. But isn't this an awfully big-budget show for them?

SRIV94 · « **Reply #34 on:** November 06, 2006, 11:33:25 AM »

[quote name=\'Clay Zambo\' post=\'137097\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 06:28 AM\']
[quote name=\'Terry K\' post=\'137090\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 05:05 AM\']
There is always FOX reality channel to burn them off.
[/quote]

True, and a nice idea. But isn't this an awfully big-budget show for them?
[/quote]
Perhaps.

And the audience would be just as small, if not even smaller.

Doug

tvrandywest · « **Reply #35 on:** November 06, 2006, 11:42:52 AM »

[quote name=\'Clay Zambo\' post=\'137097\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 05:28 AM\']
[quote name=\'Terry K\' post=\'137090\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 05:05 AM\']
There is always FOX reality channel to burn them off.
[/quote]
True, and a nice idea. But isn't this an awfully big-budget show for them?
[/quote]
The budget was one issue in the show's cancellation. As I believe Matt pointed out before, by not airing the remaining 9 episodes FOX saves on not having to pay the "winning" contestants. I'm told by one crew member who worked the 5 taping days that there were some big winners, so the savings is millions of dollars.

Randy
tvrandywest.com

chris319 · « **Reply #36 on:** November 06, 2006, 11:49:02 AM »

This may be a first in U.S. television history. A show is cancelled not because of poor ratings, but to avoid having to pay contestants who won too much money on a game show.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #37 on:** November 06, 2006, 12:06:26 PM »

[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' post=\'137116\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 11:42 AM\']
The budget was one issue in the show's cancellation. As I believe Matt pointed out before, by not airing the remaining 9 episodes FOX saves on not having to pay the "winning" contestants. I'm told by one crew member who worked the 5 taping days that there were some big winners, so the savings is millions of dollars.[/quote]
That's what I was afraid of. That has to be just about the biggest suck in the history of suckdom. I mean, everybody signs those things but no wide-eyed, eager contestant thinks for a minute that their show isn't actually going to air. Imagine for a minute winning hundreds of thousands of dollars, life-changing amounts of money, and then learning weeks later that you weren't going to get it after all.

Joe Mello · « **Reply #38 on:** November 06, 2006, 12:28:13 PM »

There's probably a lawsuit in here. A losing one, probably, but a lawsuit nonetheless.

clemon79 · « **Reply #39 on:** November 06, 2006, 12:44:14 PM »

[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'137120\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 09:28 AM\']
There's probably a lawsuit in here. A losing one, probably, but a lawsuit nonetheless.
[/quote]
I thought the same thing. And you're right, ultimately they don't have a case, but at the same time, such a case would get Fox TONS of bad pub. One has to wonder if they would be willing to pay these people they screwed a little hush-money to keep it away from the media.

tvrandywest · « **Reply #40 on:** November 06, 2006, 12:52:51 PM »

I gotta disagree on the lawsuit angle. Let me clarify my earlier post.

The reason the Rich List is not on FOX's schedule and is apparently cancelled is because of very low ratings. Beyond that, the decision as to whether or not to air the remaining 9 episodes is likely affected by the fact that unaired game shows need not award "winnings" to its contestants. That is very likely one of the factors behind choosing whether or not to "burn off" the episodes in the can, but not a factor in the decision as to whether or not to cancel plans to tape future episodes. A hit is a hit, and a stiff is a stiff. No matter what the total of the winnings in the unaired episodes, if the show garnered ratings it would still be on.

Randy
tvrandywest.com

weaklink75 · « **Reply #41 on:** November 06, 2006, 12:55:31 PM »

Fox is just doing what it always seems to do....tread water til American Idol and 24 start up in January...but you have to hope that they do the right thing and at least give the contestants a percentage of their winnings (because if they did end up in a lawsuit, it could get ugly...but wouldn't the production company be part of any suit as well?)

clemon79 · « **Reply #42 on:** November 06, 2006, 12:59:35 PM »

[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' post=\'137130\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 09:52 AM\']
I gotta disagree on the lawsuit angle. Let me clarify my earlier post.
[/quote]
I realize that, and I'm not suggesting at all that they have a case (quite the opposite, in fact), but sometimes that doesn't matter; the mere act of yelling "I won eleventy billion dollars on a game show and now they won't give it to me" is probably enough to get the media interested, since most people don't know this dirty little secret that we do; they figure if you won it, you get it, whether the shows air or not.

TLEberle · « **Reply #43 on:** November 06, 2006, 01:02:16 PM »

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'137119\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 09:06 AM\']That's what I was afraid of. That has to be just about the biggest suck in the history of suckdom. I mean, everybody signs those things but no wide-eyed, eager contestant thinks for a minute that their show isn't actually going to air. Imagine for a minute winning hundreds of thousands of dollars, life-changing amounts of money, and then learning weeks later that you weren't going to get it after all.[/quote]That's one of the risks of trying out for a new unproven game show, isn't it? I wonder how many people who won a few grand on Jeopardy! in 1984 thought the same thing. Now, as long as the show rolls along, everyone gets paid, and all is right with the world.

[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'137120\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 09:28 AM\']There's probably a lawsuit in here. A losing one, probably, but a lawsuit nonetheless.[/quote]Not even a losing lawsuit, because there are probably two sentences buried in the pages of documents you sign before appearing. 1) By appearing on The Show, you waive your right to sue, and 2) If your episode of The Show doesn't air, we owe you nothing.

I got rid of the book months ago, but I bet you could find it on Amazon.com or eBay, or something. Anyway, David Wagner got on a handful of game shows in the 1980s, and thought he could parlay his "expertise" into a book, and in one chapter he went over a possible scenario that's very similar to what happened here: you get on episode 13 of "Whistle or Lose it!" and win the grand prize! Yay, good on ya and start packing for Hawaii!

Or not. The show is cancelled after two weeks because the whistling is upsetting large numbers of dogs. No trip for you, Chief, and there's Not One Thing you can do about it.

Any case brought before a judge would be tossed on summary judgment. I hope that FOX at least gave their contestants a little help with travel costs and lodging because it's the right thing to do. After all, if a contestant on show seven goes to the AP and says "I didn't get paid when I went on a cancelled game show!" the reporter is going to laugh derisively and push the 'erase' button on their voice mail recorder.

clemon79 · « **Reply #44 on:** November 06, 2006, 01:07:51 PM »

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'137133\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 10:02 AM\']
After all, if a contestant on show seven goes to the AP and says "I didn't get paid when I went on a cancelled game show!" the reporter is going to laugh derisively and push the 'erase' button on their voice mail recorder.
[/quote]
Oh, I REALLY don't agree with that. This is the kind of story that tabloid television is MADE for. I have no doubt whatsoever that one of these "wronged" (and, again, I want to stress that I understand quite well that they have no legal recourse) contestants would be able to attract the interest of _someone_ in the news media. (Especially in the throes of a sweeps period.)