The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => Game Show Channels & Networks => Topic started by: Dbacksfan12 on October 03, 2007, 10:34:12 AM
-
According to this article (http://\"http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6486218.html\") from Multichannel News, GSN slid down to a 0.2 rating for Q3.
/Still beating ESPN Classic
//Its because they don't show Sports Challenge anymore.
-
Oh cable ratings, please go to another significant digit. You should not be able to claim 'a 100% increase in viewers' when you go from 0.1 to 0.2, when it was more likely you went from 1.4 to 1.6.
--Mike
-
You should not be able to claim 'a 100% increase in viewers' when you go from 0.1 to 0.2, when it was more likely you went from 1.4 to 1.6.
(Math Teacher Mode) Uh, methinks you meant "you went from 0.14 to 0.16," right? (/Math Teacher Mode) :)
ObGS: Add 'em Up was a pricing game on TPIR that used math...which is probably why it was retired...;)
Anthony
-
Clearly switching to a primetime lineup of 2nd-rate originals and newer reruns of shows that viewers didn't even care about the first time that much, that are rerun earlier in the same day to boot, isn't helping. The move on the part of most cable ops to move GSN to the digital tier also clearly has hurt the network. Two of the network's problems may be fixable, the third - carriage - may be a tougher one to fix.
One immediate concern on the programming side is simply that primetime is most a rerun of afternoons/early evenings. Who would want to watch something that just aired six hours ago? Secondary is the fact that nothing in primetime, outside perhaps the Monday poker/blackjack shows, is really that interesting:
Let's see, we have reruns of a GSN original that ceased production 4 years ago and that hasn't been a strong ratings draw since in Whammy, a 3rd-rate remake of a show that the public largely forgot about a long time ago (Chain Reaction), an original that while fairly solid probably just doesn't captivate the general public (That's the Question), reruns of a show that lost it's fad appeal in this country years ago and that goes through a rerun cycle quickly (Weakest Link), a show that while once a top performer for the network has had viewership erode and may be done production-wise (Lingo). Then there's Flannel Feud. A show that was a modest at best peformer in syndication. And while it has the Feud name, it's also by and large the 2nd least popular rendition of the show after Louie's run on the show. And with the way primetime is scheduled, it's intended to be the flagship of primetime. And while an unoffensive way to spend a half hour, Karn's Feud probably shouldn't be a flagship *anything*.
Obviously, what they're doing now just isn't working, at all. And it's probably not going to get any better unless GSN magically regains basic cable carriage in a majority of areas, which probably isn't happening. Regardless of what GSN programs they may very well be locked into a limited audience due to the carriage program, which would suggest longterm either GSN going with an older-rerun heavy schedule and being content to be a niche network, or a *true* rebranding and refocusing of the network. If Sony still held sole control of the network, the latter probably would have already happened, but Liberty Media (specifically Liberty Capital) owns the other half of the network, and a lot of articles over the years have mentioned the company's execs liking the game show focus of the network, which is probably why the network didn't become AXN years ago.
-
And hey, how about that rename over at TVGC--uh, N? Wasn't that a smash hit?
At this point, I would throw good sense to the winds and say that GSN just put anything from the library on, even the dubious stuff--it sure can't do worse than what they've got now.
-
It always amuses me how the longer GSN goes on, the more it makes me realize how silly it was for me to complain so much back in the days when the schedule still wasn't as good as it was pre-Dark Period (heck, we all agree that the Dark Period was a good thing now in that we got six months to see shows that have never been out of the vault since!) but still infinitely better than what it does now.
For me, the last high point was 2002 when GSN had just added Marshall HSQ to the lineup and gave us a thrill of discovering an untapped trove of material from a rediscovered library that we honestly haven't seen happen since on a wide scale (only in one-shot things like ABC Password or Woolery WOF), and when B/W Overnight was going strong with the first and only airings GSN ever did of cigarette IGAS and TTTT shows. And the sad thing is, we know that if ever a trove of lost game shows ever does get discovered, they're never going to find an outlet for airing like GSN once did for HSQ or before that with CBS TJW for a brief time.
-
[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'165450\' date=\'Oct 3 2007, 05:48 PM\']
At this point, I would throw good sense to the winds and say that GSN just put anything from the library on, even the dubious stuff--it sure can't do worse than what they've got now.
[/quote]
Heck, something in there may even click.
-
I swear they'd do fine with an hour each of MG, Dawson Feud and Millionaire, since those are their ratings grabbers.
Maybe move the originals to afternoon/morning slots, since they rarely do well in prime time...
-
[quote name=\'TonicBH\' post=\'165510\' date=\'Oct 4 2007, 11:45 AM\']
I swear they'd do fine with an hour each of MG, Dawson Feud and Millionaire, since those are their ratings grabbers.
Maybe move the originals to afternoon/morning slots, since they rarely do well in prime time...
[/quote]
The problem there is that you put in prime time what you spend your most money on, so it has the best chance of possible return.
That's why, for all intents and purposes, most entertainment cable channels that aren't aimed at kids don't even bother programming first-run originals during the day--the audience is not there and the only alternative that would make any financial sense is running the same kind of court and talk shows that are already on the broadcast channels. Running GSN originals first-run during the day amongst the scooter and diabetic supply per inquiry spots will not pay back the money spent on those shows.
-
[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'165516\' date=\'Oct 4 2007, 01:00 PM\']
The problem there is that you put in prime time what you spend your most money on, so it has the best chance of possible return.
That's why, for all intents and purposes, most entertainment cable channels that aren't aimed at kids don't even bother programming first-run originals during the day--the audience is not there and the only alternative that would make any financial sense is running the same kind of court and talk shows that are already on the broadcast channels. Running GSN originals first-run during the day amongst the scooter and diabetic supply per inquiry spots will not pay back the money spent on those shows.
[/quote]
And yet, in terms of internet , that's seriously changing.
Michael Davies, last week at the AdWeek seminar, said that NBC's internet reruns get the heaviest play @ 11am-1pm.... overall internet usage drops in primetime because, wait for it, there is more competition!
I agree that Millionaire,Feud, and Match Game should be in prime....the originals should be in early prime, 5-8pm.... airing IGAS @ 11pm, to me, was dumb, even if it was 8pm West Coast.
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'165524\' date=\'Oct 4 2007, 01:18 PM\']Michael Davies, last week at the AdWeek seminar, said that NBC's internet reruns get the heaviest play @ 11am-1pm.... [/quote]
That makes sense, though. People are on lunch breaks and are more likely to be at their computer than their television.
I was under the impression that IGAS was supposed to be more "adult" than the typical fare, and that's why it was on at 11.
-
I agree that Millionaire,Feud, and Match Game should be in prime....the originals should be in early prime, 5-8pm.... airing IGAS @ 11pm, to me, was dumb, even if it was 8pm West Coast.
I'm not saying you're wrong (because for this current batch of extremely cheap originals, you are dead on), but why do you think the originals back five years ago were getting really good ratings compared to now? I mean obviously interest in the network has died significantly, but there has to be something that they aren't doing that they used to that worked.
My huge problem with the primetime schedule is that nothing feels primetime. At least with the old lineup, yeah the originals didn't give away that much more than they do now, but they offered an off-chance of winning a lot and they at least felt primetime-y. Now they feel like cheap daytime shows that they threw in primetime because they have nothing else, which is most likely the case. I think if they could get the rights to at least some of syndie Millionaire and throw that in primetime, they could recover a bit. Two years ago Millionaire was getting a .9 on the network, and it's down big time obviously. They seem to be stuck in the low-money-easy-to-win game area. Maybe one hard-to-win-bigger-money show could work somewhere. Honestly, I'm giving it a few years before the network folds and they just do casual games online, as sad as it is to say. Their new CEO, one of the heads of FUN Technologies, made me think that even more.
-
It always amuses me how the longer GSN goes on, the more it makes me realize how silly it was for me to complain so much back in the days when the schedule still wasn't as good as it was pre-Dark Period (heck, we all agree that the Dark Period was a good thing now in that we got six months to see shows that have never been out of the vault since!) but still infinitely better than what it does now.
And the sad thing is, we know that if ever a trove of lost game shows ever does get discovered, they're never going to find an outlet for airing like GSN once did for HSQ or before that with CBS TJW for a brief time.
To me, the best years of the network were the first 5 years. As a classic game show fan, we've really had nothing like it since. I understand networks need original programming, but I still have warm memories of watching the network endlessly in its early days.
I think different shows could work here and there. You need to "freshen" the schedule once in a while, and lately they've been rotating the mostly the same shows in and out. Something from the vault might click.
/Did I just say Click?...
-
Honestly, I'm giving it a few years before the network folds and they just do casual games online, as sad as it is to say. Their new CEO, one of the heads of FUN Technologies, made me think that even more.
Hmmm...if that did happen, I wonder if anyone would ever try this again?....
-
If GSN ever goes away, so does my digital cable box. At least it'll shave about $25 off my cable bill.
-
[quote name=\'DjohnsonCB\' post=\'165600\' date=\'Oct 4 2007, 10:04 PM\']
If GSN ever goes away, so does my digital cable box. At least it'll shave about $25 off my cable bill.
[/quote]
I'd be right with you, if not for....wait, I don't HAVE a cable box! :)
/god I love my Tivo HD
-
Dawson Feud bombed on Sunday night, so there's no reason to expect that plastering it all over prime time would do any better. Millionaire has been trotted out again, but severe burnout will probably limit its effectiveness. I doubt Match Game would do any better in prime than Dawson Feud did. Same for the suggestion of emptying the vault with even less well-known oldies.
GSN got 0.3 in July, according to CableWorld, so the August and September numbers must have dropped down even further to 0.2. To get persnickety, that 0.3 in July was really something like 0.27. I'm assuming 64 million household availability, with the 175K average household audience CableWorld gave. So GSN didn't have far to fall to hit 0.2.
CableWorld never published a top-50 August chart. We'll see if they put one out for September. Assuming the MultiChannel number was a "high" 0.2 (close to 0.25) means an average household audience of something like 160K for the quarter. Which is bad, even by GSN standards.
How to fix it? Millionaire has been the network's most consistent performer, so I'll make my usual suggestion of a deal for the Meredith eps. The poker show was the network's best performer in second quarter, according to Multichannel, so maybe a couple more hours in prime wouldn't hurt. Getting the WPT from the Travel Channel may help a little.
Fantasyland would be a repackage deal for Drew's TPiR eps in prime time. Hey, we can dream. But short of a complete Spike-like makeover, this looks like the only Millionaire-style big play that's even remotely imaginable.
-
Nick is taking it's GAS channel to the web and I honestly believe the ONLY thing keeping GSN alive in any form on TV is the coming deal to air "the world series of poker". With a continued ratings drop the current management (remember this current team couldn't care a bit about what the old regime did) can say "hey, we tried originals, we tried reruns, nothing clicked. Let's become a cooking network, Rachel Ray is the hot thing now". Trust me, if it was owned by Time-Warner, Rupert Murdoch, or something this would have happened already. It's poker, it's gambling, and when this bubble bursts (which it will) then they become "GSN, the General-interest Show Network"
EDIT- It was pointed out to me it's the "World Poker Tour" they are getting from The Travel Channel. That's how much attention I give these shows.
-
Since the scandals, game shows became niche programming. What's wrong with serving the game show niche and being satisfied with the small fan base? I enjoy the better crafted shows, so I haven't really watched GSN in primetime since the makeover.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'165729\' date=\'Oct 6 2007, 12:19 PM\']
What's wrong with serving the game show niche and being satisfied with the small fan base?
[/quote]
Nothing, so long as the advertising rates that fan base commands are sufficient for the channel to turn a maintain a profit. Maybe GSN can do that on 0.2's, but if they can I think that shows a rare genius in their accounting department that doesn't appear to exist elsewhere at the network.
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' post=\'165634\' date=\'Oct 5 2007, 02:15 PM\']
Dawson Feud bombed on Sunday night, so there's no reason to expect that plastering it all over prime time would do any better.
[/quote]
I think the main reason why this failed is because it was on for 5 hours in a row. I really don't know many people who would watch the same show for 5 hours in a row, unless it was a special marathon.
And to me GSN really has nothing else to lose. Would they really be killed if they gave an hour to their so called Highest Rated Classics? I would not be shocked to see if the Daytime ratings were higher than primetime.
-
[quote name=\'xavier45\' post=\'165760\' date=\'Oct 6 2007, 06:42 PM\']I think the main reason why this failed is because it was on for 5 hours in a row. I really don't know many people who would watch the same show for 5 hours in a row, unless it was a special marathon. [/quote]Except they did Game Show Saturday Night for roughly a year or so, right? I'd stick around for the Card Sharks host's tournament, or a $100,000 Pyramid tournament.
But I'm geeky like that.
-
Well that's different. Those are events, not just 5 hours of regular ol' episodes. If they did GSSN's again with Millionaire celeb weeks, or "Super Jeopardy" or even crack the vaults open for some "Monopoly" or another weird niche show, it'd be cool.
And yeah, the focus seems real heavy on Karn Feud. I was surprised to find he was pretty popular among casual TV viewers, but obviously not enough to draw people to GSN.
The shred of optimist in me says the move to digital was done by carriers to get people to buy digital. As if to say GSN had so much potential interest, they thought people would upgrade to get it. Probably not true, but oh well. I've been enjoying the network more now than ever, devoting several hours to it in the daytime to catch "Super Password," Combs "Feud," P+, etc., etc.
Re: the first 5 years of the network though, was it really that good? I can certainly understand the allure of seeing Match Game in the clear whereas before you had to go on memories or fuzzy tape, but every shred of bumpers I've seen that shows what's coming up indicates a rather pedestrian lineup. Of curse, I got the network when it was at least 6 or 7 years old and the luster of these shows being seen again had faded some, but...black and white in primetime? Pish posh. Of course, they did have the advantage then of showing different runs of shows (shopping WoF!) and the biggie - TPIR.
I guess on a side side side SIDE note, what eras of shows did they get to in those early years? Did they show early Trebek J (first few seasons), for example?
-Jason
-
[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'165797\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 01:07 AM\']
The shred of optimist in me says the move to digital was done by carriers to get people to buy digital.
[/quote]
The move to digital was done because most cable carriers have a limited amount of bandwidth to work with, and they can cram 7 or 10 digital channels in the same bandwidth as it takes for one analog one. Which means they can have 7 to 10 times more ad space to sell to clients. Most cable operators, in fact, would LOVE to get everything to digital because that maximizes their earning potential.
(Here in Seattle, in fact, most of the analog channels already are mirrored on a digital band, and it is in fact the digital ones you see more often than not, even if you're dialing up a single-digit network channel.)
So if they're going to waste an analog channel (and by extension, their potential ad space) on something, it sure as hell isn't going to be a channel pulling hash-marks.
-
[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'165797\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 03:07 AM\']
I guess on a side side side SIDE note, what eras of shows did they get to in those early years? Did they show early Trebek J (first few seasons), for example?[/quote]I didn't get the network until 1997, but I distinctly remember them airing early episodes.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'165799\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 04:26 AM\']
So if they're going to waste an analog channel (and by extension, their potential ad space) on something, it sure as hell isn't going to be a channel pulling hash-marks.
[/quote]
Ya know, I hear that, but then it makes me wonder why a certain channel by the name of G4 seems to be available on most analog channels when it would love the get the numbers of GSN these days.....
(Yes, I know they're owned by Comcast, but G4 still struggles to pull six digit viewership averages after 5 years)
Tyshaun
-
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' post=\'165812\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 09:58 AM\']
(Yes, I know they're owned by Comcast, but G4 still struggles to pull six digit viewership averages after 5 years)
Tyshaun [/quote]
Because a lot of G4's carriage is inherited from TechTV, which Comcast violated bought in 2004. When Comcast bought the channel, the cable positions went to G4. TechTV was a middle tier station with fairly nice carriage among cable ops - which ultimately was why Comcast wanted the station in the first place - as there was a time they couldn't bribe the heads of the cable companies (or Dish Network for that matter) to run the station on it's basic tiers.
-
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' post=\'165812\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 09:58 AM\']Ya know, I hear that, but then it makes me wonder why a certain channel by the name of G4 seems to be available on most analog channels when it would love the get the numbers of GSN these days.....
(Yes, I know they're owned by Comcast, but G4 still struggles to pull six digit viewership averages after 5 years)[/quote]
One, you vastly underestimate the importance of the "owned by Comcast" part. The Evil Empire protects its own.
Two, the G4 audience is primarily young men, the Holy Grail of advertisers. The GSN audience skews way, way, WAY older and much more female. Raw numbers don't matter as much as demographics, and GSN loses on both counts anyway.
-
Re: the first 5 years of the network though, was it really that good? I can certainly understand the allure of seeing Match Game in the clear whereas before you had to go on memories or fuzzy tape, but every shred of bumpers I've seen that shows what's coming up indicates a rather pedestrian lineup. Of curse, I got the network when it was at least 6 or 7 years old and the luster of these shows being seen again had faded some, but...black and white in primetime? Pish posh. Of course, they did have the advantage then of showing different runs of shows (shopping WoF!) and the biggie - TPIR.
I think a lot of it was the excitement of seeing these shows again, but their schedule seemed much more varied. The original schedule featured early years of syndie Jeopardy, Wheel of Fortune, Tic Tac Dough, Joker's Wild, plus Goodson-Todman shows not seen in years. They didn't squeeze the credits, they had shows like Club AM and Prime Games where Laura Chambers and Peter Tomarken played games with viewers, took phone calls and talked about upcoming shows, etc. It just seemed like a much warmer, friendlier place.
By the second year, they added Jim Perry's Card Sharks. The third year saw the debut of The Price is Right. Then came Oct 1997, and the not-so-dark period. It gave us our only chance to see Break the Bank, $20,000 Pyramid, Hollywood Connection, and a pile of other shows not seen since.
When GT came back in April 1998, it gave us a chance to see shows like Match Game and Tattletales right from the beginning - with fewer skipped episodes as they got more celebrity clearances by then. Plus, they had the "Game of the Week", where rare shows like Eye Guess, Fun Factory or the 2000th Fleming Jeopardy appeared.
I agree that the B&W in primetime didn't work, that's one reason why they scrapped that idea after a couple of years, but by and large the first five years were great.
-
[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'165797\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 04:07 AM\']Re: the first 5 years of the network though, was it really that good? [/quote]
In a word, YES! We're talking about a time when GSN was 24 hours of totally different programming all day long with no duplicates whatsoever. If a show was on twice a day you saw different sections of the run. We're also talking about a time when GSN was geared to an AMC (old AMC)-TCM approach to game shows as a rich legacy of television history, with vignette reminiscences by Gene Rayburn, Betsy Palmer, CNR etc. "Wide World Of Games" would see two hours of shows devoted to a theme every Saturday, and you'd also get a mini-version of it in "Weekend Showcase" overnight on Saturday/Sunday.
I got GSN in 1997 just seven weeks before the "Dark Period" began, and I filled up more than 35 tapes of material in that span because it was like being a kid in a candy store with an avalanche of riches to chose from. That's a time we'll alas never see again.
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'165826\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 12:08 PM\']
The third year saw the debut of The Price is Right.
[/quote]
And how exciting THAT was....They started trotting out TPiR at just about the same time I got DISH Network and was able to see GSN, which was November 1996. For the first few weeks or so, it would "pop up" on the schedule. I can remember tuning into "Prime Games" hoping to see a MG episode, but then Peter Tomarken would say they were going to run a TPiR episode instead. On Saturdays, I hoped to see some other classic shows, but instead, they would run a 2 hour block with a Cullen TPiR ep, a full-hour TPiR, and a 1/2 hour Kennedy syndie.
Those were indeed the days...
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'165821\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 08:34 AM\']
One, you vastly underestimate the importance of the "owned by Comcast" part. The Evil Empire protects its own.[/quote]
And I question the veracity of the original statement anyhow...I'm in the #12 market in the country, and not only is G4 on the digital tier, before Comcast bought it it wasn't even on the LOW digital tier, it was one of those jobs you had to buy an extra package for...
(That said, Comcast Seattle has *serious* bandwidth problems, so they have to be really choosy.)
/doesn't stop them from giving three channels to HSN, QVC, and Jewelry TV
-
G4 is also on the 1st digital tier in the #4 market. The only reason it was in my house was because my dad still wanted HBO and digital was the only way to keep it.
It's odd in Pittsburgh (22): GSN and G4 are extended cable, and the digital packages have several foreign language channels, but no Spanish station.
/Probably distracted by the pissing match with the Big Ten Network
-
I don't even know where G4 is on my digital tiers.
IMHO, GSN could be better if they just stuck with the basics first: Wheel, J!, Match Game, Feud, and Millionaire. Then supplement that with TPiR, $ale, and Scrabble (if they can ever get the rights), then throw whatever crap else they want. People know about most of them (all but Sale and Scrabble, at least).
That's wishful thinking, though.
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'165840\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 03:11 PM\']
/Probably distracted by the pissing match with the Big Ten Network
[/quote]
Yeah, Comcast sucks.
-
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'165841\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 03:25 PM\']
IMHO, GSN could be better if they just stuck with the basics first: Wheel, J!, Match Game, Feud, and Millionaire. Then supplement that with TPiR, $ale, and Scrabble (if they can ever get the rights), then throw whatever crap else they want. People know about most of them (all but Sale and Scrabble, at least).
[/quote]
With the exception of Match Game, all those other shows are being aired right now on regular TV. (Crosswords is just Scrabble dulled down and I'm giving Temptation a wide berth.) Why would you watch something on cable when you can see it already on regular TV? I'd rather have exclusive product.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'165847\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 01:41 PM\']With the exception of Match Game, all those other shows are being aired right now on regular TV. (Crosswords is just Scrabble dulled down and I'm giving Temptation a wide berth.) Why would you watch something on cable when you can see it already on regular TV? I'd rather have exclusive product.[/quote]Except Scrabble and Crosswords are only similar in that you solve clues to get to words; the games are different in every other way. And regarding Temptation, would you rather eat filet mignon or a hunk of grade-D meat? The two are worlds apart in terms of quality. GSN should do whatever will make them the most money. If that equals reality reruns, casino programs and infomercials, then there it is.
Quick straw poll: who even thought GSN would even last this long? Or would last through 1995? I'm a bit astonished myself.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'165847\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 03:41 PM\']I'd rather have exclusive product.[/quote]"Tune into GSN, home of Small Talk!
I can hear the clickers changing now.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'165833\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 10:43 AM\'](That said, Comcast Seattle has *serious* bandwidth problems, so they have to be really choosy.)
/doesn't stop them from giving three channels to HSN, QVC, and Jewelry TV
[/quote]
Hmm, there mu$t be $ome rea$on for that.
It's odd in Pittsburgh (22): GSN and G4 are extended cable, and the digital packages have several foreign language channels, but no Spanish station.
There still aren't even any over-the-air Spanish TV stations in Pittsburgh, are there?
(The first time I saw Game Show Network "live" was a few weeks before the end of the Dark Period, in my apartment in Library, PA, when I was one of the first customers of TCI of the South Hills to have digital cable installed. They had sent out a postcard listing the new digital channels. When I got down the list to 161, I knew I'd be making a call ASAP.)
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'165833\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 01:43 PM\']
/doesn't stop them from giving three channels to HSN, QVC, and Jewelry TV
[/quote]
Disturbing fact I read two weeks ago in the New York Times. Only one out of every 150 people watching a shopping channel are buying anything. That means the other 149 are watching for entertainment value.
--Mike
-
[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'165891\' date=\'Oct 8 2007, 07:57 AM\']
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'165833\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 01:43 PM\']
/doesn't stop them from giving three channels to HSN, QVC, and Jewelry TV
[/quote]
Disturbing fact I read two weeks ago in the New York Times. Only one out of every 150 people watching a shopping channel are buying anything. That means the other 149 are watching for entertainment value.
--Mike
[/quote]
Is it more disturbing that they're actually watching it for entertainment, or that everything else is bad enough that a shopping channel looks good?
-
[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'165891\' date=\'Oct 8 2007, 07:57 AM\']
Disturbing fact I read two weeks ago in the New York Times. Only one out of every 150 people watching a shopping channel are buying anything. That means the other 149 are watching for entertainment value.[/quote]
"No thanks, just browsing."
-
Quick straw poll: who even thought GSN would even last this long? Or would last through 1995? I'm a bit astonished myself.
I was hoping this would be a bigger hit than it is. I guess when it first went on the air, I didn't realize game shows were in sort of a "niche" area. After all, they've been on TV practically since the beginning. Somebody other than us must be watching them...
-
[quote name=\'catnap1972\' post=\'165899\' date=\'Oct 8 2007, 08:53 AM\']
[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'165891\' date=\'Oct 8 2007, 07:57 AM\']
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'165833\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 01:43 PM\']
/doesn't stop them from giving three channels to HSN, QVC, and Jewelry TV
[/quote]
Disturbing fact I read two weeks ago in the New York Times. Only one out of every 150 people watching a shopping channel are buying anything. That means the other 149 are watching for entertainment value.
--Mike
[/quote]
Is it more disturbing that they're actually watching it for entertainment, or that everything else is bad enough that a shopping channel looks good?
[/quote]
AHEM!....um... let's see here...
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'165847\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 03:41 PM\']
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'165841\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 03:25 PM\']
IMHO, GSN could be better if they just stuck with the basics first: Wheel, J!, Match Game, Feud, and Millionaire. Then supplement that with TPiR, $ale, and Scrabble (if they can ever get the rights), then throw whatever crap else they want. People know about most of them (all but Sale and Scrabble, at least).
[/quote]
With the exception of Match Game, all those other shows are being aired right now on regular TV. (Crosswords is just Scrabble dulled down and I'm giving Temptation a wide berth.) Why would you watch something on cable when you can see it already on regular TV? I'd rather have exclusive product.
[/quote]
Actually, that makes me curious...if you asked random people whether they'd rather watch an episode of Wheel from 1988 or Card Sharks from 1988, which one do you think would get more votes? Or, more to the point, more eyeballs?
(insert some obvious point about the television industry and $$$ that I've missed/left out here)
-
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'165841\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 02:25 PM\']
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'165840\' date=\'Oct 7 2007, 03:11 PM\']
/Probably distracted by the pissing match with the Big Ten Network
[/quote]
Yeah, Comcast sucks.
[/quote]
QFT. Although BTN isn't blameless either.
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'166253\' date=\'Oct 10 2007, 11:11 PM\']
Actually, that makes me curious...if you asked random people whether they'd rather watch an episode of Wheel from 1988 or Card Sharks from 1988, which one do you think would get more votes? Or, more to the point, more eyeballs?[/quote]
I think if I asked random people that, I'd get a lot of looks of confusion, revulsion, and/or pity. And a lot of straight "no" answers. Sorry.
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'166253\' date=\'Oct 11 2007, 12:11 AM\']
Actually, that makes me curious...if you asked random people whether they'd rather watch an episode of Wheel from 1988 or Card Sharks from 1988, which one do you think would get more votes? Or, more to the point, more eyeballs?
(insert some obvious point about the television industry and $$$ that I've missed/left out here)
[/quote]
Wheel has been the most watched prime access show for some time. Chances are most random people have already seen it and, if that viewer is like most non-fans, probably has no desire to see it again. GSN should program to game show fans, just as ESPN caters to sports fans, TCM to movie fans, etc. If they can't make money on it, use the transponder for something else.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'166720\' date=\'Oct 14 2007, 03:46 PM\']If they can't make money on it, use the transponder for something else.[/quote]
I wonder if they can cook a hot dog on it.
Your reasoning has a minor flaw. There are few people who don't like sports or don't like movies. I'm betting there are more than a few that don't like game shows. Besides, the definition of "game show" has gotten quite unclear recently, so then you have to make judgment calls as to what you consider game show material.
Initials aside, I don't understand why you can't have a network for games and have a moderately expanded programming scope.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'166720\' date=\'Oct 14 2007, 03:46 PM\'][quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'166253\' date=\'Oct 11 2007, 12:11 AM\']Actually, that makes me curious...if you asked random people whether they'd rather watch an episode of Wheel from 1988 or Card Sharks from 1988, which one do you think would get more votes? Or, more to the point, more eyeballs? [/quote]Wheel has been the most watched prime access show for some time. Chances are most random people have already seen it and, if that viewer is like most non-fans, probably has no desire to see it again. [/quote]
I've been holding off on commenting here, but I completely disagree with this reasoning. To me, if you're polling random people, more people are going to say they want to watch Wheel than want to watch Card Sharks, because more people have HEARD of Wheel.
This appears to be, for better or worse, GSN's programming philosophy. As much as possible, their programming line-up is things the average viewer recognizes, whether it be "classics" like Match Game and Family Feud, or more recent shows like Millionaire and Amazing Race. The problem with that approach is that it might gain you some casual surfers, who stumble across something they recognize and stop, but it doesn't build any loyalty. You only get that with original programming, but the catch-22 here is that the average viewer by and large isn't motivated to seek out original game show programming.
I don't claim to know what the answer is, or even if there is an answer. I'd personally like to see a bigger effort in original shows than I've seen lately (I'm still stunned they didn't make more IGAS), but that's probably just the fan in me talking.
-
Matt, I totally agree. IGAS was entertaining. The analogy could be drawn like: More people have heard of The Price is Right versus Crosswits so more people want TPiR. I don't buy it at all. Variety is a wonderful thing.
Open up the vaults...show original Hollywood Squares, Joker's Wild while also air originals.
People will watch if you give them what they would like....if GSN would acknowledge that most of their core viewers want to watch the classics AND air them, while adding some of the new programming, you might have a channel worth watching. And...air the shows AS IS, quit squeezing the shows back for the same promos that run in every single break. Let's hear why these shows are classics...the announcing, the tacky end spots, Gimme Turtle Wax and Rice-A-Roni. Lemme hear that this was a Mark Goodson, Bill Todman Production. Lemme hear "This program was taped before a live studio audience"...or "Stay tuned for "Love is a Many Splendid Thing"."
Sorry for the vent.
PS....and drop the GSN. It's the GAME SHOW NETWORK. DUH! All gameshows, all the time.
-
[quote name=\'toddyo\' post=\'166750\' date=\'Oct 14 2007, 09:49 PM\']
"Stay tuned for "Love is a Many Splendid Thing"."
[/quote]
I don't believe a game show ever led into "Love Is A Many Splendored Thing." (The show took its name from the title of an old song.)
-
[quote name=\'davemackey\' post=\'166768\' date=\'Oct 15 2007, 07:09 AM\']
[quote name=\'toddyo\' post=\'166750\' date=\'Oct 14 2007, 09:49 PM\']
"Stay tuned for "Love is a Many Splendid Thing"."
[/quote]
I don't believe a game show ever led into "Love Is A Many Splendored Thing." (The show took its name from the title of an old song.)
[/quote]
To be even more precise, that song was the title song from the movie (http://\"http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048316/\") of the same name, and the TV show was loosely based on the movie.
-
[quote name=\'toddyo\' post=\'166750\' date=\'Oct 14 2007, 08:49 PM\']
Matt, I totally agree. IGAS was entertaining. The analogy could be drawn like: More people have heard of The Price is Right versus Crosswits so more people want TPiR. I don't buy it at all. Variety is a wonderful thing.[/quote]
Um, not sure if that's agreement or disagreement. Anyhoo, Matt's right, and I'm not just saying that because he's the moderator. Though being the moderator doesn't hurt. It's good to be moderator. To extend Matt's line of reasoning a little further, more people would prefer Wheel to Card Sharks because a lot more people seem to like Wheel. That's why the show is still on and still pulling nice numbers, while Card Sharks sleeps with the...well, I won't say it.
If GSN started showing original eps of Wheel with Pat and Vanna and Charlie and the whole gang, their ratings troubles would disappear in a hurry. Of course, the producers aren't nuts, and that's why original eps of Wheel are in nice time slots in syndication instead of some obscure cable net. The idea that GSN can rocket to ratings success with dusty reruns of obscure game shows is only a pet fantasy of game show fanatics like you and me.
GSN's greatest success with reruns, by far, came with Millionaire. Which wasn't exactly some little-known relic from the vault. I have no idea if GSN tried to snag reruns of Deal or No Deal, or if NBC was always going to repurpose them on CNBC. But Deal would have been an enormous ratings boost as well. If you want numbers from reruns, you need shows that more people besides game show fanatics have heard about and watched, in proven numbers. That's why GSN should grovel in the dust to get a TPiR deal, though that may only be my pet fantasy. (By the way, this source (http://\"http://www.allbusiness.com/services/business-services-miscellaneous-business/4792049-1.html\") says CNBC got an average of 543K viewers for Deal in 2006. GSN would have sold the soul of every employee for that number.)
As for originals, GSN does seem to trying hard on their own shows. But only the poker show looks to have achieved consistent success, even by GSN's low standards. My guess on IGAS: it tried to be hip with the all-gay panel, which turned off the traditional audience but was hardly daring enough to attract a new audience.
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' post=\'166782\' date=\'Oct 15 2007, 11:33 AM\']
My guess on IGAS: it tried to be hip with the all-gay panel, which turned off the traditional audience but was hardly daring enough to attract a new audience.[/quote]
It definitely tried too hard to be hip, but despite the fact that we kept hearing about the all-gay panel in early publicity, and we made our jokes about "I've got a Fabulous Secret" that part of it really didn't seem to matter much when the show finally aired.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'166786\' date=\'Oct 15 2007, 09:05 AM\']
It definitely tried too hard to be hip, but despite the fact that we kept hearing about the all-gay panel in early publicity, and we made our jokes about "I've got a Fabulous Secret" that part of it really didn't seem to matter much when the show finally aired.
[/quote]
Yep...I thought the most refreshing thing about the show was that they *didn't* make a big deal out of it, when they *could* have.
-
The idea that GSN can rocket to ratings success with dusty reruns of obscure game shows is only a pet fantasy of game show fanatics like you and me.
...
If you want numbers from reruns, you need shows that more people besides game show fanatics have heard about and watched, in proven numbers. That's why GSN should grovel in the dust to get a TPiR deal, though that may only be my pet fantasy.
At certain times in GSN's history, they have aired current games on a few-week delay. Woolery's version of Dating Game, Eubanks '97-99 run of Newlywed Game, and the first couple of years of Hollywood Squares for examples. Maybe they should try to strike deals like that again - put shows like current Wheel, Jeopardy and Price on in later primetime to "give people who missed them a chance to catch up". The extra cost would probably be worth it for the spike in ratings they'd almost certainly get.
Since we've basically agreed that people don't seek out first-run game show programming on obsure cable networks, they could run the classics (Match Game, Family Feud, etc) and not-so-classic (Break the Bank, Go) during the day. Maybe keep some well-proven reruns in weekend primetime (like Millionaire) and bring back interstitual games such as Decades. I'm not saying that should necessarily be brought back, but they could do something like that again. It was neat in the "old days" to have play-breaks between shows. Who says every show has to start at :00 or :30 all the time? Maybe try it out on weekends or late-night first to see it it will fly.
Good ideas?
/Did I mention that Drew Carey "gets it"?
//What about Betty White?
///Seems one or the other has to be said in a post these days :)
-
I was thinking about this randomly yesterday, and I wondered something: Would getting a currently syndicated game show running concurrently on GSN help it? They've done it before with the modern DG and NG revivals, perhaps getting something like MGC or Temptation would get a small punch.
Although, I'd have to agree with Casey that maybe getting some Wheel back on the schedule should be something considered. While I'm not asking for shopping-era episodes in prime time, seeing Jeopardy! without Wheel preceding or following is quite weird. (Yes, I'm aware of networks that air Wheel at 6PM and Jeopardy! at 1AM. Your network is silly for doing so.)
Of course, the best thing they could try at least is digging back into the vault...
/Speaking of which, where the fish is my damn Pyramid?!
-
[quote name=\'TonicBH\' post=\'166833\' date=\'Oct 15 2007, 03:02 PM\']
I was thinking about this randomly yesterday, and I wondered something: Would getting a currently syndicated game show running concurrently on GSN help it? They've done it before with the modern DG and NG revivals, perhaps getting something like MGC or Temptation would get a small punch.[/quote]
In fact, current management's attitude towards "repurposing" is totally mystifying to me. It seems to me that it would give a boost to "Feud," "Temptation" and "Crosswords" (the merits or lack of aside) and would be a big promotional boost to "TPIR." (I don't see "Wheel," "J!" or even "WWTBAM" going that route). Even prime time shows could help like "Pof10" or "...5th Grader?" or "Lyrics" (the latter two should be on Fox Reality, but it seems like that management has a firm "no game shows" edict, even with Bob Boden around). And what about some reality comps like "Dancing?"
Of course, if GSN couldn't even make money on call-in-and-lose shows...
-
[quote name=\'TonicBH\' post=\'166833\' date=\'Oct 15 2007, 03:02 PM\']
Although, I'd have to agree with Casey that maybe getting some Wheel back on the schedule should be something considered. While I'm not asking for shopping-era episodes in prime time, seeing Jeopardy! without Wheel preceding or following is quite weird. (Yes, I'm aware of networks that air Wheel at 6PM and Jeopardy! at 1AM. Your network is silly for doing so.)
[/quote]
Doesn't practically the entire Central time zone get Jeopardy at 4:30 and Wheel at 6:30 or something similar? I know that's at least the case in both the markets I've lived in. That's what happens when you only get a half-hour between The News Block and The Primetime Block.
-
I still think that GSN needs to re-learn the concept of Variety.
For years it seems that it's always the same old shows all the time. Fine, you want to run Millionaire, Feud, Match Game, etc. But a great many of us got tired of them years ago, because we've seen them all.
Give me things I haven't seen recently, and I'll watch. It's why I have season passes on Trivia Trap and Now You See It.
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'167025\' date=\'Oct 16 2007, 06:12 PM\'] Doesn't practically the entire Central time zone get Jeopardy at 4:30 and Wheel at 6:30 or something similar?
[/quote]
Only in some instances. I've seen quite a few markets that air Jeopardy at 6:00, with Wheel following at 6:30.
-
[quote name=\'Gromit\' post=\'167154\' date=\'Oct 17 2007, 05:21 PM\']
I still think that GSN needs to re-learn the concept of Variety.[/quote]
Yes, they definitely need to ink deals for more boff skeins.
-
What I hope the extended run of NYSI and Trivia Trap will mean is that once a short-lived show in this overnight slot gets through its run, GSN can then showcase another short-run title that they can get through in six months to a year and kind of do it in a "here's your one chance to get this show for who knows how long" kind of way. If GSN would just once get through the entire run of their holdings of $20K (a little less than two years), Pass The Buck, Chain Reaction and Break The Bank (which only got one third or half of their run done even when they were on during the DP), that would tap out all the things I'd still like to see GSN do based on what currently exists in their holdings.
-
Will there be any upcoming episodes of NYSI that haven't been seen since their original broadcast?
Or has GSN aired the entire run before?
-
Well, GSN has aired the entire NYSI series once or twice prior to October '97 and even prior to the Steve Kaplan's J! theme era days and last night's show was the same as the one that was uploaded on PoC last year.
-
Yeah....um......what she/he/it said...
(Go home, Iris!)
-
September was just a sad month for GSN. For the first time in a long time, GSN was number 50 of 50 in Cableworld.com's ratings. The channel finished at number 50 with a .2 and 153,000 people watching the network in September.
So from the looks of it, Millionaire did not help them at all, Karn did not help them at all, and should we be suprised Chain Reaction did not help them at all. Now could they look at the classics and maybe putting some in primetime?
http://www.cable360.net/cableworld/departments/ratings/ (http://\"http://www.cable360.net/cableworld/departments/ratings/\")
-
[quote name=\'xavier45\' post=\'167229\' date=\'Oct 18 2007, 01:15 PM\']So from the looks of it, Millionaire did not help them at all, Karn did not help them at all, and should we be suprised Chain Reaction did not help them at all. Now could they look at the classics and maybe putting some in primetime?[/quote]
You could also make the argument that if it weren't for Millionaire, Karn and Chain Reaction, their ratings might have been even worse. I agree that at .2, it pretty much doesn't matter what you try, but don't use the numbers to "prove" something that isn't necessarily so.
-
The only episodes of Now You See It that haven't been run since their original broadcasts are Chuck Henry's.
If GSN would just once get through the entire run of their holdings of $20K (a little less than two years), Pass The Buck, Chain Reaction and Break The Bank (which only got one third or half of their run done even when they were on during the DP), that would tap out all the things I'd still like to see GSN do based on what currently exists in their holdings.
Agreed - especially on Break the Bank. Unfortunately, they only aired it once a week when it was on the schedule. Since they only seem to air Goodson-Todman short-lived shows though, there doesn't seem to be much hope does there? Still, it would be a shame if they couldn't run everything in their library at least once. I know they've run pretty well everything from Goodson-Todman at least once.
-
Yes, the Sunday night only airings of BTB, and weekends only on CR and PTB (which itself got yanked partway through the DP for infomercials) is ultimately the most frustrating thing about their scheduling selection of what they had during the DP. Go! was the only short-lived series of note to get through its entire run during the DP (with one episode skipped from the week with Lynn Redgrave-Richard Gilliand).
Whether "Mindreaders" exists or not, and how much more of "The Better Sex" exists is the only remaining question regarding late 70s Goodson shows.
-
The September number is no surprise. I guesstimated that GSN did about a 160K average for third quarter, 2007, based on the Multichannel story. The network did 175K in July, so the 153K in September is pretty much in line with the estimate.
Matt's right about the argument for more oldies in primetime. Of course, what they're mostly showing in primetime right now are oldies - just not as old as some people on the board would like. The idea that even older shows would do better is dodgy, to say the least. Not that GSN could do much worse with anything in primetime.
Interestingly, the network is promoting the living daylights out of the very old shows in daytime. (I kind of like the "Rayburn's Eleven" shtik.) Maybe they've decided to be just a rerun outlet and not spend a dime on anything original. Or they've been forced to that strategy by the terrible numbers.
Hate to say it, but it must be bitter irony for GSN that reruns of Deal or No Deal have pushed CNBC above them in the primetime pecking order.
-
I'm a game show fan, but I have to admit I've been watching CNBC more than GSN in prime. I like the ins and outs of the stock market and DoND.
However, you never know what will catch fire in the world of reruns. "Star Trek" was much more popular in syndication than it ever was on the network. Same is true of "The Brady Bunch" and "The Odd Couple." On the other hand, there were some big network hits that didn't perform well in syndication, for example, "Fantasy Island" and "Rhoda."
USA ran "Hot Potato" and other short-run games for a good deal longer than their original runs, so you never know what will work until you try, though GSN may run into flack from cable operators if it runs 30 year old reruns. I'm happy with GSN's daytime and late-night skeds for the most part, so I'm okay with watching something other than GSN in prime.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'167446\' date=\'Oct 20 2007, 02:17 PM\']USA ran "Hot Potato" and other short-run games for a good deal longer than their original runs, so you never know what will work until you try, though GSN may run into flack from cable operators if it runs 30 year old reruns. [/quote]That was something that surprised me; to come home and there were game show reruns on USA. (And Family Channel, so obviously it wasn't just one channel.) Oh, to be a fly on the wall when there was the meeting to get the rights to LMAD and other stuff.
But what's the difference between a rerun from 1977 as opposed to 1987 or 1997? After all, isn't that what GSN is in the business of? Reruns?
-
But what's the difference between a rerun from 1977 as opposed to 1987 or 1997? After all, isn't that what GSN is in the business of? Reruns?
We'd like to think so...and I'd love to see 30-year old reruns in primetime. If it still has some sort of audience, why not? (Just ask Andy Griffith!)
I wonder about those USA days. Do you think they held onto shows like Hot Potato, Face the Music and Pat Finn's Joker's Wild for so long because licensing old titles was tougher at that time? When many of those shows were on USA, it was when cable was just starting to take off. Probably nobody knew if it would be a hit, and what would end up being a hit. Maybe they just tried a few lesser titles to see how they would do. They didn't get into the bigger titles (like Press Your Luck or $25,000 Pyramid) until a few years later. Just speculation...
Interestingly, CBN had reruns of Blockbusters around that time. If they could license that, I wonder why they didn't try for more Goodson stuff back then. Maybe our ideal GSN could have started sooner.
-
IIRC, the only Goodson shows CBN had were also those that were distributed off-net by Firestone, so I'm thinking CBN dealt with Firestone rather than Goodson itself.
Do you remember the interactive game show block on the Family Channel? That sure looked to me to be a pilot of what FAM's proposed Game Show Channel would have looked like if they had launched. I know Randy West was there, so maybe he could shed some light?
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'167541\' date=\'Oct 21 2007, 04:39 PM\']
Do you remember the interactive game show block on the Family Channel? That sure looked to me to be a pilot of what FAM's proposed Game Show Channel would have looked like if they had launched. I know Randy West was there, so maybe he could shed some light?
[/quote]
I'm not Randy (but yet, who is?), but I can indeed tell you that those early 90's shows were the testing grounds for Pat Robertson's GSC. But due to Sony going around and acquiring all the major properties (leasing Goodson-Todman, buying Barry-Enright and Barris), and USA still having the rights to PYL, Reg Grundy and Pyramid, the well dried up for FAM quickly and it never got off the ground. They did get classic LMAD and Crosswits '86, but would you launch an entire network around those two and Trivial Pursuit?
Tyshaun
/sit down, Iris
//slashies are kind of fun :)
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'167479\' date=\'Oct 20 2007, 09:23 PM\']
After all, isn't that what GSN is in the business of? Reruns?[/quote]
Reruns are a fact of life on just about every non-sports, non-news channel (and even quite a few sports and news channels). However, I don't think anybody at GSN would say they're "in the business of" airing reruns.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'167541\' date=\'Oct 21 2007, 04:39 PM\']
IIRC, the only Goodson shows CBN had were also those that were distributed off-net by Firestone, so I'm thinking CBN dealt with Firestone rather than Goodson itself.
[/quote]
They also ran the 78-81 run of Card Sharks at one point. Were those reruns distributed by Firestone?
Greg
-
I don't remember CS reruns on CBN, but I do remember WABC in New York airing reruns of CS directly opposite SOTC on WNBC, which meant in NY Jim Perry was competing against himself!
-
Card Sharks was definatly on CBN as was Goodson's "Blockbusters" They also had "$50,000 pyramid", "Bullseye", "Treasure Hunt", "Lets make a deal", could those all have been Firestone?