The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => Game Show Channels & Networks => Topic started by: tyshaun1 on May 13, 2004, 08:03:53 PM
-
Here are the changes in a nutshell:
Fake-A-Date is gone completely
Family Feud on Sat. nights is bye-bye
$100,000 Pyramid is out
Hollywood Squares reduced to weekends @ 10:30
Star Search weekdays @ 11AM and 7PM
Match Game and Lingo from 6-7 PM except on Saturdays
Dog Eat Dog weekdays @ 9pm
Mole reduced to Sundays @ 11PM
Street Smarts weekdays @ 11PM, 9PM Saturdays
Everything else pretty much remains the same (including BB, Match Game, and PYL on weekends)
Tyshaun
-
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 13 2004, 07:03 PM\'] Here are the changes in a nutshell:
Fake-A-Date is gone completely
Family Feud on Sat. nights is bye-bye
$100,000 Pyramid is out
Hollywood Squares reduced to weekends @ 10:30
Star Search weekdays @ 11AM and 7PM
Match Game and Lingo from 6-7 PM except on Saturdays
Dog Eat Dog weekdays @ 8pm
Mole reduced to Sundays @ 11PM
Street Smarts weekdays @ 11PM, 9PM Saturdays
Everything else pretty much remains the same (including BB, Match Game, and PYL on weekends)
Tyshaun [/quote]
What about 6-7PM on Saturdays, what is on at that time come mid-June? Sucks about Pyramid and Squares(but considering how many damn times those two seasons of $100K have been run, it's not as painful I guess). Is Card Sharks still on weekends?
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'May 13 2004, 07:08 PM\'] [quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 13 2004, 07:03 PM\'] Here are the changes in a nutshell:
Fake-A-Date is gone completely
Family Feud on Sat. nights is bye-bye
$100,000 Pyramid is out
Hollywood Squares reduced to weekends @ 10:30
Star Search weekdays @ 11AM and 7PM
Match Game and Lingo from 6-7 PM except on Saturdays
Dog Eat Dog weekdays @ 8pm
Mole reduced to Sundays @ 11PM
Street Smarts weekdays @ 11PM, 9PM Saturdays
Everything else pretty much remains the same (including BB, Match Game, and PYL on weekends)
Tyshaun [/quote]
What about 6-7PM on Saturdays, what is on at that time come mid-June? Sucks about Pyramid and Squares(but considering how many damn times those two seasons of $100K have been run, it's not as painful I guess). Is Card Sharks still on weekends? [/quote]
Yes, CS is still on (Hence, why I said everything else remains the same). I believe Average Joe takes the Sat. 6-7 slot, but I'm not sure, since I didn't pay too close attention to the slot for obvious reasons ;).
Tyshaun
-
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 13 2004, 07:48 PM\'] [quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'May 13 2004, 07:08 PM\'] [quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 13 2004, 07:03 PM\'] Here are the changes in a nutshell:
Fake-A-Date is gone completely
Family Feud on Sat. nights is bye-bye
Yes, CS is still on (Hence, why I said everything else remains the same). I believe Average Joe takes the Sat. 6-7 slot, but I'm not sure, since I didn't pay too close attention to the slot for obvious reasons ;).
Tyshaun [/quote]
I'm so glad I asked :) I'm surprised to see Blockbusters staying with Pyramid gone(even if $100K needs a rest, though the 1985-86 season hasn't been seen in four years other than a tourney or two during a marathon). I wonder if they'll keep with MG76 in the 6PM MG slot and give MGPM a rest...
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'May 13 2004, 09:06 PM\'] [quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 13 2004, 07:48 PM\'] [quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'May 13 2004, 07:08 PM\'] [quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 13 2004, 07:03 PM\'] Here are the changes in a nutshell:
Fake-A-Date is gone completely
Family Feud on Sat. nights is bye-bye
Yes, CS is still on (Hence, why I said everything else remains the same). I believe Average Joe takes the Sat. 6-7 slot, but I'm not sure, since I didn't pay too close attention to the slot for obvious reasons ;).
Tyshaun [/QUOTE]
I'm so glad I asked :) I'm surprised to see Blockbusters staying with Pyramid gone(even if $100K needs a rest, though the 1985-86 season hasn't been seen in four years other than a tourney or two during a marathon). I wonder if they'll keep with MG76 in the 6PM MG slot and give MGPM a rest... [/quote]
How much longer is left until the episodes with Kyle Aletter air?
-
[quote name=\'cmjb13\' date=\'May 13 2004, 08:16 PM\']
How much longer is left until the episodes with Kyle Aletter air? [/quote]
They didn't start until mid-to-late August 1988(when Lacey took her leave). We have three or four months to go before they get that far. In April 2002(11:30AM EST second rotation consisting of six months of episodes from 1988) and September 2003(Vertivision), GSN got very close to Kyle's time on CS in the rotation when those airings were axed, but I don't believe ever got to any of the episodes.
-
Although I fear that this "rest" we're all talking about means "never to be seen again until GSN2."
-
you're right, mitchgroff, GSN should make a GSN2 with classics.
-
[quote name=\'JacksonBrowne1980\' date=\'May 13 2004, 08:35 PM\'] you're right, mitchgroff, GSN should make a GSN2 with classics. [/quote]
Yes, they should. No, they won't.
Doug -- and the countdown to 500 continues
-
[quote name=\'JacksonBrowne1980\' date=\'May 13 2004, 08:35 PM\'] you're right, mitchgroff, GSN should make a GSN2 with classics. [/quote]
Mitch didn't say that at all....
-
My one worry was that the Mole was going to be taken off the schedule, as I'm having a ball rewatching the first season. I'm glad to see it's still there, even if it's only on Sunday nights. Hopefully they keep it on the schedule long even to get through both civilian seasons.
-
I was worried a little about Mole, too. I'm not watching the first civvie series because I know the outcome. But I'd like the see the second civvie and celeb versions. I'm afraid the show isn't getting very good numbers, though. Otherwise, it wouldn't have gotten booted out of prime time and exiled to late night Sunday.
Speaking of the numbers, it looks like the Prof's dump on KvS was more editorializing than an objective view of the ratings. The Canadian duo will get two prime time slots on the new schedule. If KvS were really tanking as badly as the Prof hoped/reported, it would have gone the way of Fake-a-Date and the video games block.
And speaking of the complete new schedule:
http://adlink.com/resource_center/programm...04&endtime=1770 (http://\"http://adlink.com/resource_center/programming_grids/apg.cfm?netid=14909&begweek=06/14/2004&endtime=1770\")
Have to admit I don't understand the GSN2 idea. What exactly would go on this channel, assuming a launch was economically feasible? Even after June 14 GSN is full of classics: LMAD, Feud, CS, Jeopardy, H2, Blockbusters, MG, PYL, WoF, LC, WL, Millionaire, NG, Greed, WML, Password, BtC.
The new channel would either have to duplicate many of these shows, or haul out extreme rarities that might thrill the hardcores but get thoroughly negligible numbers with the great unwashed teevee audience. Seems to me that the new channel would either fold fast or become a clone of much of the current GSN sched.
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 14 2004, 07:17 AM\'] Have to admit I don't understand the GSN2 idea. What exactly would go on this channel, assuming a launch was economically feasible? Even after June 14 GSN is full of classics: LMAD, Feud, CS, Jeopardy, H2, Blockbusters, MG, PYL, WoF, LC, WL, Millionaire, NG, Greed, WML, Password, BtC. [/quote]
Casey since you are not a hardcore classic fan you will never understand these type of things. Just like some of us don't understand your fascination with some of the current programs on GSN. It is just one of those things that can't be explained. You like what you like and we like what we like. Just as simple as that.
-
No, what I don't understand is what GSN2 would show. If the network tried to dig up, I dunno, Treasure Hunt and Whew and Bullseye, it would get test-pattern numbers and quickly fold - if it could get carriage from any cable operators in the first place.
So GSN2 would be forced to program much better-known shows like Millionaire and Match Game and Feud and Jeopardy, etc. And at that point it starts looking a lot like the current GSN. So what's the point of a separate channel?
Twenty years down the road there will probably be so many channels that these considerations will be irrelevant. But right now I don't see how GSN2 could get by without showing much of the same stuff currently on GSN.
By the way, if you can't understand my "fascination" with a game show like Blackjack, you can't understand anybody's fascination with any game show. Terrific suspense, interesting gameplay, entertaining contestants, intelligent and funny hosts...do I really have to explain this?
-
I envision a GSN2 as a haven for older, traditional game show programming. It would be similar to the Nick GAS and MTV/VH1 video channel prototype. No ads except those for the parent network. There would be no need for ratings because there would be no ads. It would be included free to cable operators in a package with GSN1. All of the greats and not-so-greats would be here. Some of you here may not be able to remember the old USA game show block, but they used to take virtually any available game show that originally ran 20 weeks or longer and run it for several cycles and they had a 10 year game show block. Sometimes, if you put a show on, people will watch.
-
"No need for ratings because there would be no ads." Um, how would this network be run, as a public service by GSN? Why would they spend a dime on it for rights fees and other operating costs? There are a lot more cost-effective ways to advertise the parent network. How would you force cable operators to carry GSN2? Threaten to pull GSN? That would really put the fear of God into the operators. Most of them think GSN is a dinky niche offering for the retirement home audience. You're gonna sell them on a network built around Whew reruns?
Sorry, I just don't see the feasibility of this operation in the current marketplace. When channels are as cheap and unlimited as web pages, then I can see the possibility. But we're not close to that.
GSN has been muttering about a new interactive gameplay channel. Frankly, I think that's a long shot for success. But I don't see how a 24/7 schedule of really obscure and really old game shows (or 12/7 allowing for the infomercials that would be necessary to keep the thing afloat) could possibly succeed. And if you tried less obscure game shows...well, you've got a duplicate of GSN.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'May 14 2004, 09:52 AM\'] Some of you here may not be able to remember the old USA game show block, but they used to take virtually any available game show that originally ran 20 weeks or longer and run it for several cycles and they had a 10 year game show block. Sometimes, if you put a show on, people will watch. [/quote]
Actually I disagree with that rationale a bit. Most of the shows that kept USA's block going were pretty successful in the original runs (PYL, 3 years on CBS, 8 years on USA, Pyramid, 5 1/2 on CBS, 7 on USA, Scrabble, 6 years on NBC, 4 years on USA). Most of the shorter run series also had short runs on USA in comparison as well (Wipeout, 2 years on USA, 1 in synd., High Rollers '87 2 years on USA, 1 in synd.) So to say the short run series held up USA's block is pretty much inaccurate. Although if it wasn't for USA's game block, there probably wouldn't be a GSN at all.........
Tyshaun
-
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 14 2004, 10:03 AM\'] Although if it wasn't for USA's game block, there probably wouldn't be a GSN at all.........
Tyshaun [/quote]
Congratulations on the dumbest post of the week!
USA's block of games were a low cost way to fill a large chunk of programming. Period. It's ratings , it's cost, it's viewers, it's color scheme had NOTHING to do with GSN.
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' date=\'May 14 2004, 10:22 AM\'] [quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 14 2004, 10:03 AM\'] Although if it wasn't for USA's game block, there probably wouldn't be a GSN at all.........
Tyshaun [/quote]
Congratulations on the dumbest post of the week!
USA's block of games were a low cost way to fill a large chunk of programming. Period. It's ratings , it's cost, it's viewers, it's color scheme had NOTHING to do with GSN. [/quote]
You're missing the point. USA's game block proved that you could run repeats of game shows and still draw a sizable audience. If you were to go back and look at some articles from Broadcasting magazine from early '94, Pat Robinson's company and Sony both mention this when they were both trying to start their game show networks. So before you call someone's post "dumb", why don't you go check your facts first?
Tyshaun
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' date=\'May 14 2004, 10:22 AM\']
Congratulations on the dumbest post of the week!
USA's block of games were a low cost way to fill a large chunk of programming. Period. It's ratings , it's cost, it's viewers, it's color scheme had NOTHING to do with GSN.[/quote]
Matt,
So long as tmq800 and GSWitch (among others) continue to amaze us with their nuggets of wisdom, there is no one else deserving of the dumbest post of the week moniker. Personally, I think both USA and Pat Robertson proved that there was a market for "re-purposing" game shows and I think that certainly helped GSN get off the ground. I wonder how many other first-graders in the early-80's rushed home after school to watch Blockbusters on CBN....
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 14 2004, 11:02 AM\'] "No need for ratings because there would be no ads." Um, how would this network be run, as a public service by GSN? [/quote]
The model that Jimmy's probably thinking of are the current video-only channels operated by Viacom, things like MTV2 and VH1 Classic. Nick's GAS probably works similarly. They're typically carried on digital platforms where channel space is easier to come by. I'm a little confused at the business models of these channels myself. My only guess is that they actually do squeeze a few pennies out of the carriers and those few pennies cover the minimal production costs.
But there are huge differences. The biggest is that for these video channels, the programming itself is either free, preposterously cheap or owned outright by the parent company. Game shows can't be acquired for free, and one company doesn't own all the game shows you guys want to see. So right away, that model isn't practical.
There are other issues, including the demographic appeal of a second channel when the "parent" channel is only marginal to begin with. Another issue is that you probably need a super-colossal company backing you. Sony is big, but Viacom is super-colossal. So while the dream of a spin-off channel showing us obscure product (hey, Spin-Off!) is a lovely dream, it is only a dream.
-
There are other issues, including the demographic appeal of a second channel when the "parent" channel is only marginal to begin with.
No doubt that's the real problem. ESPN can sell its spinoffs to the system operators because it pulls decent numbers all the time and huge numbers (by cable standards) some of the time. So the parent network has some real leverage, as shown in the recent dispute over the fees ESPN was demanding. The operators really didn't want ESPN vanishing from their systems.
GSN has zero leverage. Cable operators aren't spending sleepless nights worrying that Match Game reruns will disappear from their schedules.
Having said that, some spinoff channels seem almost like vanity projects for the parents, and I'm pretty confused about their business models, too. But a shoestring operator like GSN can't afford vanity, or persuade its corporate parents to afford vanity. And I still don't understand how GSN2 could offer programming that would be remotely attractive in the current marketplace - unless they just dished out retreads of GSN's most popular offerings.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'May 14 2004, 01:04 PM\'] The model that Jimmy's probably thinking of are the current video-only channels operated by Viacom, things like MTV2 and VH1 Classic. Nick's GAS probably works similarly. They're typically carried on digital platforms where channel space is easier to come by. I'm a little confused at the business models of these channels myself. My only guess is that they actually do squeeze a few pennies out of the carriers and those few pennies cover the minimal production costs.
[/quote]
Also from what I understand is that these are used somewhat as loss leaders. Someone like Viacom gives them VH-1 Classic as something that's a throw-in when they go for a rate hike, and then can string them along even more during the next one when they really can't get rid of the channel, since it would be perceived by the consumer as a loss of something. I believe the Encore channels worked the same way.
Matt's also right about the cost of the programming. VH-1 Classic has two on-air personalties, runs only 8 hours of packaged programming a day (the block is repeated twice during the day) and pretty much only has to pay the residuals on the music, since the videos for the most part were either given to MTV Networks for free or have long been paid for.
There could someday be a valid business model for a GSN2, but that day is far, far in the future. Now if just ESPN Classic would go back to showing old sports, rather than just shows about old sports. But that's a discussion for another place.
--Mike
-
And I guess this "Vegas Weddings" is a new reality show.
Boy, if this is GSN's way of turning away viewers, so be it.
-
To Casey:
Have to admit I don't understand the GSN2 idea. What exactly would go on this channel, assuming a launch was economically feasible? Even after June 14 GSN is full of classics: LMAD, Feud, CS, Jeopardy, H2, Blockbusters, MG, PYL, WoF, LC, WL, Millionaire, NG, Greed, WML, Password, BtC.
I have to admit I am a classic game show fan. So... yes, these should/could be featured on the fictional GSN2. However, you forget that many of the shows you listed have multiple incarnations. (And how do you determine Greed or Weakest Link to be classics, by the way? In the history of television, these wouldn't even be considered blips.)
The new channel would either have to duplicate many of these shows, or haul out extreme rarities that might thrill the hardcores but get thoroughly negligible numbers with the great unwashed teevee audience. Seems to me that the new channel would either fold fast or become a clone of much of the current GSN sched.
No, it doesn't for the reason I stated above. As for the potential ratings, I wholeheartedly agree; they'll be dismally low. But how great you think Nick GAS' ratings are?
By the way, if you can't understand my "fascination" with a game show like Blackjack, you can't understand anybody's fascination with any game show. Terrific suspense, interesting gameplay, entertaining contestants, intelligent and funny hosts...do I really have to explain this?
Some current GSN programming in no way equals all. You danced around the point he was trying to make.
Brandon Brooks
-
Casey's definition of a "classic" seems to imply that he thinks ANY in-studio "traditional" game show should be called a classic, whether it'd be Friend or Foe, Greed, Weakest Link, Cram, what have you. Even though none of these shows made more than 100 episodes or would be remembered at all by the general public.
-
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 15 2004, 10:16 AM\'] Casey's definition of a "classic" seems to imply that he thinks ANY in-studio "traditional" game show should be called a classic [/quote]
His definition changes over time, to include anything and everything in the past. That way, anyone who finds fault with a new addition to the schedule can be labeled a "traditionalist" and their comments can be dismissed.
-
In fact, my cynical definition of a classic is any old game show not currently on GSN. But the shows I mentioned would probably be considered game show classics by anybody who wasn't trying to take a shot at somebody.
Sorry, folks, but I still don't understand what a GSN2 would program or how it could possibly get onto any significant number of systems. Everybody seems agreed that the channel would get ridiculous, unmeasurably low ratings if it programmed obscure old game shows.
So how does the channel ever get launched in the first place? "Mr. System Operator, we've got this channel that almost nobody will watch because it only has old game shows that almost nobody remembers. Will you give it carriage? No? Well then we're gonna pull GSN and all those Match Game reruns from your system!"
"Mr. System Operator, why are you laughing at me?"
So to get the channel going at all, you'd have to program better-known shows like Millionaire, Wheel, Jeopardy, etc.
Which means you'd have a clone of the current GSN. What's the point?
On a related topic (as they say in encyclopedias) I'm by no means fascinated by all of GSN's new programming. Fake-a-Date (mercifully gone), Spy TV and KvS all look real lame to me. I do think Blackjack is one of the very best originals GSN has produced, and I like Mole. So GSN has gone 2-for-5 on the new shows as far as I'm concerned. Not bad for baseball...but far from perfect.
What I don't understand is the tendency to lump all the new shows together and barf on them all. People should pick their barf targets more carefully.
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 15 2004, 04:01 PM\'] Sorry, folks, but I still don't understand what a GSN2 would program or how it could possibly get onto any significant number of systems. Everybody seems agreed that the channel would get ridiculous, unmeasurably low ratings if it programmed obscure old game shows.
So how does the channel ever get launched in the first place? "Mr. System Operator, we've got this channel that almost nobody will watch because it only has old game shows that almost nobody remembers. Will you give it carriage? No? Well then we're gonna pull GSN and all those Match Game reruns from your system!" [/quote]
We'll it worked in 1994, so I don't see why it wouldn't work today.
-
In fact, my cynical definition of a classic is any old game show not currently on GSN. But the shows I mentioned would probably be considered game show classics by anybody who wasn't trying to take a shot at somebody.
That makes very little sense to me, so I can only assume you just threw some shows together and called them classics. Fine.
Sorry, folks, but I still don't understand what a GSN2 would program or how it could possibly get onto any significant number of systems. Everybody seems agreed that the channel would get ridiculous, unmeasurably low ratings if it programmed obscure old game shows.
Alright, you're becoming circular, and it's not that you don't understand, you don't want to. I already answered this question with what I think is a viable answer. Whether you agree with the reasoning or not is your choice. Again, networks such as Nick GAS, MTV2, VH-1 Hits, VH-1 Soul, Toon Disney, etc. are around and I can almost assure you that their ratings are not that good when compared to their parent channels. While GSN2 is likely not to happen in the near future, the point is that it could, even if you don't understand how anyone could watch such a channel.
Brandon Brooks
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'May 14 2004, 01:04 PM\'] My only guess is that they actually do squeeze a few pennies out of the carriers and those few pennies cover the minimal production costs.
[/quote]
As far as Nick GAS is concerned; I'm convinced the MLS, PBA, etc. are paying for those segments during commercials.
-
Well, maybe I can try a different approach. Instead of calling it GSN2, perhaps call it "The 70's Channel: For people who remember the '70's and who are now in their '70's." It would not be ad supported but a closed circuit channel where the cash would come from retirement communities and convelescent homes who would pay GSN for the service for their residents. Sony would at least get some use out of their library. It doesn't have to be all game shows, either. After each 2 hour block of games, there would be an hour of "My Little Margie" and "I Married Joan."
-
[quote name=\'Brandon Brooks\' date=\'May 15 2004, 06:44 PM\'] Alright, you're becoming circular, and it's not that you don't understand, you don't want to. I already answered this question with what I think is a viable answer. Whether you agree with the reasoning or not is your choice. Again, networks such as Nick GAS, MTV2, VH-1 Hits, VH-1 Soul, Toon Disney, etc. are around and I can almost assure you that their ratings are not that good when compared to their parent channels. While GSN2 is likely not to happen in the near future, the point is that it could, even if you don't understand how anyone could watch such a channel. [/quote]
This valid argument is getting dangerously close to being personal, so I urge everybody to be a little more careful with their choice of words.
Meanwhile, I thought I already made the counter response to Brandon's point myself. Nick GAS, MTV2, VH-1 Hits, VH-1 Soul and Toon Disney (to use every single one of your examples) either own their programs or pay very little for them, so the cost of operating such channels is relatively small. Sony owns a handful of properties, but not nearly enough to program a round-the-clock GSN2.
Also, Toon Disney is owned by...well...Disney, and all the others are owned by Viacom. Both are MAJOR players in cable television and have the clout to make cable operators carry their fringe stuff in a way that Sony does not.
Finally, these secondary channels are backups to some of the most fundamental basics of cable television. MTV, Nickelodeon, Disney and (to a lesser extent) VH-1 are cable television brand-name standards. GSN is not.
These are three real, valid, impersonal reasons why a GSN2 isn't realistic, and there are other reasons as well. I've yet to see anyone address any of those points, I've just seen people say that no matter what the evidence, Sony could do a GSN2 if they wanted to. Sony is big enough to try to do anything if it wanted to. But I'd sure like to see some real, valid arguments about why it would make any economic sense at all for them to try this, and I really don't think I've seen them on this thread.
-
I agree with everything Matt says, which could be a sign that the world has gone crazy...or sane...or at least different.
Anyway, what people overlook is that the vanity channels always seem to have a highly rated parent channel pushing them on the system operators. Nick GAS has (now split) Nicklelodeon, EPSNwhatever has ESPN, the video channels have MTV, etc.
GSN2 would have GSN as its parent. And most system operators regard GSN as a two-bit, low-rated, bad-demo channel for old folks. So what leverage does GSN possess to force GSN2 onto the systems?
Short answer: none. So the odds are enormously against launching a new channel of mostly forgotten game shows. I can't even see GSN getting much carriage for the interactive gaming channel they're talking about, though that may be a slightly easier sell. Other programmers are talking about gameplay on teevee as a possibility, at least.
Down the road it may be so cheap and easy to launch a teevee channel - as cheap and easy, say, as launching a web board - that this argument won't apply. But for now it's a show-stopper.
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 16 2004, 09:42 AM\'] I agree with everything Matt says, which could be a sign that the world has gone crazy...or sane...or at least different.
Anyway, what people overlook is that the vanity channels always seem to have a highly rated parent channel pushing them on the system operators. Nick GAS has (now split) Nicklelodeon, EPSNwhatever has ESPN, the video channels have MTV, etc.
GSN2 would have GSN as its parent. And most system operators regard GSN as a two-bit, low-rated, bad-demo channel for old folks. So what leverage does GSN possess to force GSN2 onto the systems?
Short answer: none. So the odds are enormously against launching a new channel of mostly forgotten game shows.
Down the road it may be so cheap and easy to launch a teevee channel - as cheap and easy, say, as launching a web board - that this argument won't apply. But for now it's a show-stopper. [/quote]
Just one question, Casey: How do you know what cable operators think of GSN? Did you ask them?
Tyshaun
-
You could take a peek at the Adlink demos and get a real good idea of what operators think of GSN. The channel skews old, female and lower-income.
Life ain't fair and there's nothing morally wrong with these demos. But most people in the teevee business aren't thrilled with that viewer profile because it limits advertising possibilities pretty severely.
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 16 2004, 09:50 AM\'] You could take a peek at the Adlink demos and get a real good idea of what operators think of GSN. The channel skews old, female and lower-income.
Life ain't fair and there's nothing morally wrong with these demos. But most people in the teevee business aren't thrilled with that viewer profile because it limits advertising possibilities pretty severely. [/quote]
There are several other channels that have heavily skewed (sometimes poorly skewed) dempgraphics, that's what niche channels tend to do. But that doesn't mean the operator thinks less of the channel, especially since you didn't answer the question. ;)
Tyshaun
-
So, I guess the best hope for a GSN2 would be if Viacom or ABC/Disney bought GSN. Then there would be leverage with cable operators, etc. In the near future, might there be an indivdualized pay-per-view system where you call your cable company, ask them to rack up "Whew!" episode #153 and go from there, since it has been discussed that there is no market for game show DVDs and alternatives to GSN?
-
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 16 2004, 10:59 AM\'] There are several other channels that have heavily skewed (sometimes poorly skewed) dempgraphics, that's what niche channels tend to do. But that doesn't mean the operator thinks less of the channel, especially since you didn't answer the question. ;) [/quote]
Parsing the precise wording of an argument is a weak way to make a point. If I was a cable operator, I'd personally be very fond of GSN, of course, because I like game shows. There may very well be quite a few cable operators who are personally fond of GSN.
The fact remains that GSN actually is a low-rated, bad-demo channel, and any cable operator who would let his personal opinion blind himself to that fact probably wouldn't remain a cable operator very long.
Jimmy Owen said:
So, I guess the best hope for a GSN2 would be if Viacom or ABC/Disney bought GSN.
Something like that. Or FOX, or NBC Universal. None of those are very likely either, of course. One of us could win the lottery (I'm thinking a multi-state one), buy up a lot of libraries and make a deal with Direct TV too. As long as we're dealing within the framework of what is possible in a world of limitless possibilities.
-
Of course, Matt is correct. (Hey, I can kiss up to the guy in charge!) I have no idea if the people who make decisions at cable and satellite systems are personally fans of game shows or not. But they don't get paid to put personal faves on their systems. They get paid to put stuff on their screens that will get the best numbers and demos.
GSN does okay as a niche cabler, but it still reaches just over 50 million households in the country. The big cable nets reach 80 million of so. That's a pretty telling indicator that the systems aren't clamoring for GSN.
On the other hand, I'm actually a little surprised that GSN has been able to grow its household availability as much as it has. Sooner or later technology may reach a tipping-point where just about any programming that appeals to more than three people might get a place on cable and satellite systems, because places could be virtually unlimited. The Internet-ization of teevee, you might call it.
That's when GSN2 stands a chance. That's when the Match Game Network might stand a chance, with a MGN2 spinoff that only features non-Dawson episodes. Or Game Show Forum Live could be on television, which is a pretty sobering thought.
But we ain't there yet.
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 16 2004, 07:38 PM\'] Or Game Show Forum Live could be on television, which is a pretty sobering thought. [/quote]
Shhh! You're not supposed to blab about Matt's summer replacement for "Quizbusters." :-D
-
I just realized GSN's been stuck at the 50-55 million mark ever since Rich Cronin took over. That indicates that even the network hasn't done much to push for broader coverage over the past couple of years, which usually means that TPTB aren't happy with the network itself. So if the suits aren't pleased, that makes a GSNPlus or GSN2 less than likely. Now excuse me, I have to go parse some more. ;)
Tyshaun
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 16 2004, 07:38 PM\'] Or Game Show Forum Live could be on television, which is a pretty sobering thought.
[/quote]
Casey, I guess you didn't get the confidentiality memo....now I'll get to move up from announcer to host because you violated the agreement.
Where's Randy? ;-)
-
I guess I'll toss in my 2¢ in for the scheduling moves that caught my eye the most...
Fake-A-Date is gone completely
Well, I've never watched F-A-D whatsoever, but my Mom has, (Who, by the way, is a gigantic dating show connoisseur.) and she really didn't like the show. (And this is coming from somebody who likes just about anything closely related to a dating show.)
I'll take her word for it. Good move for now, at least.
$100,000 Pyramid is out
I'll go out on a limb and say that this could be a blessing in disguise. $100,000 Pyramid was LONG overdue for a rest, and now will finally get it. But for how long?
Star Search weekdays @ 11AM and 7PM
Hmm. Interesting. If this is only the most recent run, we could very well see some runintheground-itis. Could be a good move IF both classic and recent version are in the mix, though.
Dog Eat Dog weekdays @ 9pm
How many episodes of Dog Eat Dog have been taped? If this isn't a future case of a show that will be quickly ran into the ground, I don't know what is.
Street Smarts weekdays @ 11PM, 9PM Saturdays
Now this would be a good move. Heck, considering the number of seasons taped, and the number of episodes picked up, I'd run it twice a day.
Overall:[/i][/u]
The Pros:- PYL is not going anywhere yet! YIPPIE! (Same can be said for BTC, CS, BB, and TANLMAD)
- Overall, good schedule placement for Street Smarts.
- The departure of F-A-D.
The Ehhh‘s:- $100,000 Pyramid getting a much deserved rest. But for how Long?
The Cons:- Too many possible candidates for the next show to be too quickly ran into the ground.
The Bottom Line
Could be worse, I guess. Still won't be watching GSN more than 3 hours a week, though.
-
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'May 16 2004, 07:46 PM\'] [quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 16 2004, 07:38 PM\'] Or Game Show Forum Live could be on television, which is a pretty sobering thought. [/quote]
Shhh! You're not supposed to blab about Matt's summer replacement for "Quizbusters." :-D [/quote]
"Summer replacements" are so old-fashioned. We choose instead to strategically repurpose previously aired epiosdes.
-
In the near future, might there be an indivdualized pay-per-view system where you call your cable company, ask them to rack up "Whew!" episode #153 and go from there, since it has been discussed that there is no market for game show DVDs and alternatives to GSN?
This has been brought up before. Even thericker on the GSN boards stated something like this might be a possibility. But he didn't give any indication of when - I'm guessing at least a decade - maybe more.
-
How many episodes of Dog Eat Dog have been taped? If this isn't a future case of a show that will be quickly ran into the ground, I don't know what is.
Best I can gather from various web sites is that 26 episodes were taped, and three never made it to air on NBC. The network pulled the plug before the second season was over. Which seems a little weird because the show was still doing halfway decent numbers for a summer offering, according to news reports at the time. The babe-o-licious second-season episode with NFL cheerleaders did particularly good numbers. Why is this not surprising?
My guess is that GSN will churn through a couple cycles of the show in the 9:00 slot, then decide if the numbers warrant grinding the show anywhere else on the schedule. Something else will have to go into the 9:00 slot unless the show proves magically resistant to rerun abuse, like Lingo. Which I doubt.
From the little I remember of the show, plus the few clips that still work on the Internet, I'm kinda looking forward to watching a few episodes. I like stupid stunt shows...Beat the Clock, Cram. The stunts seem a little more outlandish on the Dog, and the contestants (especially the female ones) wear less clothing. But I can tolerate that.
Hmm. Interesting. If this is only the most recent run [of Star Search], we could very well see some runintheground-itis. Could be a good move IF both classic and recent version are in the mix, though.
According to the GSN press release, this is only a pickup of the Arsenio version:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040505/law115_1.html (http://\"http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040505/law115_1.html\")
This show doesn't look like a long-term five-a-week staple, either, because so few episodes are on the shelf. If the show does acceptable numbers, GSN might pick up other talent contests, like the original McMahon version. I'm not big on talent contests with any host, so I'll pass.
Well, I've never watched F-A-D whatsoever, but my Mom has, (Who, by the way, is a gigantic dating show connoisseur.) and she really didn't like the show.
Chris Lambert pretty well nailed this one on his site. The show tried to be clean and naughty at the same time, and it didn't work. Plus, Joe Millionaire should find other work.
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 17 2004, 09:04 AM\']and three never made it to air on NBC[/quote]
Wonder if they will air the episode with Claudia Jordan?
-
Yeah, let's see if some of the people who complained about Stacey complain about this one. ;) ;)
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 17 2004, 08:04 AM\'] The stunts seem a little more outlandish on the Dog, and the contestants (especially the female ones) wear less clothing. [/quote]
In the one ep that I remember seeing, one contestant ended up wearing NO clothing. Her stunt was "Strip Quarterback" (or something very close to that). A more generously-endowed female contestant had been eliminated in the previous round, and I imagine the two men wish they had made their choices in the opposite order.
-
Too much emphasis has been placed on The $100,000 Pyramid anyway. It has been 2 years since they last played The New $25,000 Pyramid.
-
[quote name=\'AH3RD\' date=\'May 24 2004, 11:40 AM\'] Too much emphasis has been placed on The $100,000 Pyramid anyway. It has been 2 years since they last played The New $25,000 Pyramid. [/quote]
Yeah, well, effective this change they will be airing NO Pyramid at all. I'd rather they keep airing $100K then nothing.
-
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 13 2004, 06:03 PM\']Here are the changes in a nutshell:
Fake-A-Date is gone completely
The only thing good about it was the girls anyway.
Family Feud on Sat. nights is bye-bye
Eh, it airs enough anyway
$100,000 Pyramid is out
Nooooooooooooooooo, Hopefully this is temporary, but knowing GSN this may be the last time we ever see it. Besides The "New" Pyramid
Hollywood Squares reduced to weekends @ 10:30
Aww, I was just starting to watch it alot
Star Search weekdays @ 11AM and 7PM
No Comment
Match Game and Lingo from 6-7 PM except on Saturdays
OK
Dog Eat Dog weekdays @ 9pm
Yes! Yes! Yes! *Two Months Later* This episode again?! Nuff said
Mole reduced to Sundays @ 11PM
Eh, I like it. At least it's not cutting off it's run that it started
Street Smarts weekdays @ 11PM, 9PM Saturdays
Not like DED where episodes could run out, thank you GSN
Everything else pretty much remains the same (including BB, Match Game, and PYL on weekends)
Fine with me
Tyshaun[/quote]
My thoughts are bolded in the quote.
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'May 17 2004, 07:54 AM\']
In the near future, might there be an indivdualized pay-per-view system where you call your cable company, ask them to rack up "Whew!" episode #153 and go from there, since it has been discussed that there is no market for game show DVDs and alternatives to GSN?
This has been brought up before. Even thericker on the GSN boards stated something like this might be a possibility. But he didn't give any indication of when - I'm guessing at least a decade - maybe more.[/quote]
Interesting idea. I went over to the GSN Boards to see what was already discussed; the only relevant thread I could find was this poll (http://\"http://www.gsn.com/buzz/showthread.php?threadid=45357&highlight=payperview\"). Does anyone remember what other people have said about the idea of pay-per-view game shows? I have an idea how this could come about, although it's a long shot.
-
It bothers me that they're removing the pyramid from the schedule. All they need to do is take off Blockbusters, LMaD, & PYL and they'll be little worth watching.
Oh well, maybe we'll get to see another older pyramid soon.
$20,000 pyramid would be wonderful to see again. Do ya guys think that will ever happen?
-
$20,000 pyramid would be wonderful to see again. Do ya guys think that will ever happen?
Unfortunatly, I wouldn't count on it. It was great to see it during what some people refer to as "The Dark Period", and it was disappointing that they still have almost a years' worth of episodes (fall 1979-June 1980) that haven't been seen since their original run. However, given the current direction of GSN, older shows like that don't have much of a chance of appearing on the schedule again.