Vivendi and Sci Fi Finances
I probably improperly posted this on "good side". Since we aren't supposed to rain on the happy parade, I will put this here.
Trying to add to the factual side of the discussion. The decision to go to series must be heavily based on fianancial considerations. Vivendi is the current owner of Universal and Sci Fi Channel. Vivendi is a French water utility whose CEO went on a buying spree and purchased Universal. This put the company in over $30 billion of debt at the end of 2001. Furthermore Vivendi had been charged with fraud. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...vendi_sec_dc_2 Quote:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp..._nbc_vivendi_2 Quote:
Vivendi for the time being is Sci Fi's owner. They can do whatever they want to with Sci Fi or it's assests. The French love Jerry Lewis. They can play endless reruns of Jerry Lewis movies if they want to. They can fire Bonnie Hammer or declare her the Queen of outer space and Battlestar Galactica. Sci Fi's decision probably has a lot more to do with these financial factors than ratings or anything else. And now this just came in. The situation has been complicated by this news today. I am sure Sci Fi will spend a lot of time making this decision. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...tspossiblesnag [QUOTE] NBC, Vivendi merger hits possible snag Wed Dec 31, 6:30 AM ET NBC and Vivendi Universal Entertainment's seemingly problem-free merger has hit a snag because internal NBC documents have antitrust enforcers worried about the effect the deal could have on consumers, people familiar with the deal say. [/QUOT |
Remember, ratings is how a tv channel makes money.
The more people who watch, the more who buy the sponsors' products. The more people who buy the sponsors' products, the more the sponsors will pay for their ad time. In the end, running a tv channel is a very simple equation: you want to pay as little as possable for shows that will attract as many viewers as possable from the best demographics possable. Sci-Fi could go to all Jerry Lewis all the time, but if people don't watch that then Vivendi will go bankrupt. Vivendi is not going to push Sci-Fi to not spend money (since nobody wants to buy ad time on dead air), but they are going to push Sci-Fi to spend money only on things that will have a rapid return on investment. Making the original investment plus 1% in 6 months beats making 200% of original investment but no money comes in for at least a year. So, Vivendi is only interested in buying a BSG series under 2 situations: 1) It won't begin production soon, so that they don't have to pay for it soon. Delay it 6 months and NBC pays the bill. 2) It will be ready immediately and start raking in massive advertising dollars. Most likely, a mixture of the two. Buy 5 episodes right away and hope that keeps the fans happy for 6-9 months. :) |
Well, I am sure Sci Fi Channel is looking at all possible options. It is a very unusual time for the entertainment industry. Peter posted this Variety story earlier today at the CA forum.
Quote:
I won't quote the entire article to save bandwidth but you can read it at: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...etime_pickle_1 An additional quote from the end of the article, I thought was interesting. Quote:
As far as the merger news, there was a story that GE NBC was considering a merger with Time Warner. This could have caused the FCC to look harder at the NBC acquistion of Vivendi's Universal and the Sci Fi Channel. However there are reports that Time Warner is looking at a merger with MGM studios instead. I would imagine the NBC Vivendi deal will go through the Republican controlled FCC without too many problems. The quicker Vivendi is out of the picture the better. But your cable rates may be going up with all the mega mergers going on. I am relieved that Sci Fi is taking time to consider all the options. I hope they also consider some of the new technology that could allow real science fiction shows instead of Mad, Mad House and Crossing Over nonsense. |
Any thoughts that maybe adverts will blend in with the program like it did in the golden age of television?
|
I would be willing to pay to get rid of the commercials. I don't like watching Sci Fi Channel now because of the unending commercials.
I hope the new technology will allow me to focus where I spend my money. There are only a few basic cable shows I watch. I would rather pay for the stuff I watch and get rid of the shopping channels, food channel, and other junk. The signal to noise ratio on cable and broadcast networks is mostly noise. Advertisers make it worse. I hope broadband and compression technology develop to the point where I can go to a website, give them my credit card number, and download HDTV versions of my favorite shows. Screw waiting for HDTV antennas and broadcasters, network executive approvals, advertisers, and all the other middlemen. Spend money for the shows you actually enjoy. I would purchase right now commercial free downloads of Firefly, Farscape, or Battlestar Galactica. My eyes wouldn't glaze over waiting for the commercials to end. |
I thought that little additional 'quote' was interesting too Slider.
|
I just dug out an old magazine, a Not Of This Earth fromt he early 90's that had a huge article on Battlestar Galactica.
One of the things they talked about was that ratings were not what did Galactica in. It was consistantly in the top 15. What did it in was the cost to ratings ratio. Sitcoms are cheap and easy to make, but Galactica cost $1 million per episode. While it could turn a profit at that cost, it cost more than every shoe that got better ratings. Why spend $1 million dollars an episode for a 26 market share when Mork and Mindy is getting better ratings at a fraction of the cost? You know what's cheaper than sitcoms? Reality shows. I fear commercial programming is doomed. |
Thank you SPY ONE ......a lot of People are forgetting that
it was the COST of the show and not the ratings that did BSG in. |
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:09 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.11, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content and Graphics ©2000-Present Colonial Fleets