Author Topic: Could Barker's Successor Be Known? (Read 8861 times)

chris319 · « **Reply #15 on:** June 23, 2006, 02:06:47 PM »

Quote

The notion that the show cannot succeed without Barker is hogwash.

Everything you said before that I'm with, except for this.

Sorry, it's already been proven. A good friend of this board explained to me that the audiences at the live shows get every bit as frenzied about TPIR at Harrah's as they do at studio 33, even though a) they're not going to be on TV, b) the odds are that they won't win any prizes, and c) they're not going to see Barker. This last one surprised me as it shoots the theory that TPIR audiences come to Hollywood to idolize Barker. With Bob out of the way they can pay the new emcee a fraction of Barker's salary and go back to a three-day taping schedule which will save them close to if not more than $1 million per year. TPIR can continue with the same geriatric accounts it has now (Procter & Gamble and S.C. Johnson don't buy TPIR) but with a much higher profit margin.

FOXSportsFan · « **Reply #16 on:** June 23, 2006, 02:38:47 PM »

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'122288\' date=\'Jun 23 2006, 02:06 PM\']

Quote

The notion that the show cannot succeed without Barker is hogwash.

Everything you said before that I'm with, except for this.

Sorry, it's already been proven. A good friend of this board explained to me that the audiences at the live shows get every bit as frenzied about TPIR at Harrah's as they do at studio 33, even though a) they're not going to be on TV, b) the odds are that they won't win any prizes, and c) they're not going to see Barker. This last one surprised me as it shoots the theory that TPIR audiences come to Hollywood to idolize Barker. With Bob out of the way they can pay the new emcee a fraction of Barker's salary and go back to a three-day taping schedule which will save them close to if not more than $1 million per year. TPIR can continue with the same geriatric accounts it has now (Procter & Gamble and S.C. Johnson don't buy TPIR) but with a much higher profit margin.
[/quote]

But there's enough familiarity in place *similar set and props* to appease folks. I really doubt that whoever takes over after Bob is going to inherit the same set and feel that the current daytime version has.

clemon79 · « **Reply #17 on:** June 23, 2006, 02:44:31 PM »

[quote name=\'FOXSportsFan\' post=\'122293\' date=\'Jun 23 2006, 11:38 AM\']
But there's enough familiarity in place *similar set and props* to appease folks. I really doubt that whoever takes over after Bob is going to inherit the same set and feel that the current daytime version has.
[/quote]
Why wouldn't they? What fool is going to say "Yeah, I'll take the Price job. But you HAVE TO CHANGE THE SET."?

They would incur the added expense necessary to change the set if they thought it would improve the viewership of the show. And, this just in: they seem to be doing just fine there.

clemon79 · « **Reply #18 on:** June 23, 2006, 02:47:17 PM »

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'122285\' date=\'Jun 23 2006, 10:50 AM\']
Are you kidding? Watch Conan some time. He ain't exactly selling diabetes supplies, Medicare supplements and mobility scooters.
[/quote]
Sure. But Conan didn't catch on and gain acceptance for the first year or two, either, remember. And in 1993 in the 12:30a time slot, a network was willing to give someone time to catch on. Do you seriously see CBS giving a new unknown host in this day and age two years catch on? 'Cuz I don't.

chris319 · « **Reply #19 on:** June 23, 2006, 03:58:50 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'122296\' date=\'Jun 23 2006, 11:47 AM\']
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'122285\' date=\'Jun 23 2006, 10:50 AM\']
Are you kidding? Watch Conan some time. He ain't exactly selling diabetes supplies, Medicare supplements and mobility scooters.
[/quote]
Sure. But Conan didn't catch on and gain acceptance for the first year or two, either, remember. And in 1993 in the 12:30a time slot, a network was willing to give someone time to catch on. Do you seriously see CBS giving a new unknown host in this day and age two years catch on? 'Cuz I don't.
[/quote]
You miss the point entirely. First, TPIR is Fremantle's property, not CBS'. Second, NBC's Late Night franchise attracts major advertising accounts (beer, cars and movies largely) while TPIR doesn't even attact the household products accounts (P&G, S.C. Johnson, CP) that it used to. Conan sells Lexuses while Barker sells The Scooter Store. Which show do you think is considered the bigger deal by its respective network brass?

Fremantle will audition some new emcees, among whom might be some of the Harrah's emcees and even Rich Fields, Barker will point to his successor and utter "Rosebud" before going into eternal slumber.

clemon79 · « **Reply #20 on:** June 23, 2006, 04:13:31 PM »

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'122300\' date=\'Jun 23 2006, 12:58 PM\']
You miss the point entirely.
[/quote]
I'm not sure I miss it so much as I think we may be making two different ones. But your comments are well-taken.

Quote

Fremantle will audition some new emcees, among whom might be some of the Harrah's emcees and even Rich Fields, Barker will point to his successor and utter "Rosebud" before going into eternal slumber.

Which begs the question: WILL Barker even do that? I'm not sure his ego will allow him to believe that it's a torch that CAN be passed. He might just do the show until he croaks (probably after missing an Inspiration Putt*) and then Fremantle will have to decide what to do with absolutely no Seal Of Approval. (Not that such a Seal is necessary in the least, but I'm just sayin'.)

* /ratfarts!

TwoInchQuad · « **Reply #21 on:** June 23, 2006, 04:56:32 PM »

You know, I don't watch the show these days (haven't for about 25 years, I think), but it seems to me that it would show a little class and and a lot of grace on Barker's part to do the same thing for **his** replacement that Ralph Edwards did for him on "T or C", back in the 50s. Which I consider to be one of the nicest hosting transitions that I've ever seen... right up there with Garry M. & Joe G. on TTTT.

From all accounts, though, that seems-- shall we say, **unlikely** to happen.

-Kevin

MrGameShow · « **Reply #22 on:** June 24, 2006, 12:12:03 PM »

But keep in mind.. they had a whole "temp auditions" period for Rod's replacement.. but then Rich got the position.

Now, take the GSM - it was a super surprize that RICKI LAKE was chosen for the Marathon rather than Todd Newton, yet it happened. They decided to teach someone so distant from game shows the methods to hosting a game show - yet they totally bypass the guy that would have run CIRCLES around them, with almost little need for rehearsals.

You can't tell me that CBS doesn't have their hand in the cookie jar when it comes to saying who or what goes on with the show.. every production company out there has to answer to the higher brass of the network - since they are the ones ultimately held accountable for what happens when someone tunes to their channels.

So would Dave Price REALLY be that much of a stretch? It's just like saying why did Conan sign a deal to host the Tonight Show in FIVE YEARS.. what happens if he gets tired of this circuit in three? WhatEVER would the Tonight Show do!!

Last I remember Barker being interviewed - he's on a year-to-year contract basis. (Correct me if I'm wrong) But could CBS just turn around and do what they did to Rather? "Well Bob, we really appreciate you bringing all the viewership and ratings to our network.. and you've been a great asset.. BUT it's time for you to go; we're not renewing your contract. Enjoy retirement.. get out."

Neumms · « **Reply #23 on:** June 25, 2006, 01:14:19 AM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'122303\' date=\'Jun 23 2006, 03:13 PM\']
Which begs the question: WILL Barker even do that? I'm not sure his ego will allow him to believe that it's a torch that CAN be passed. He might just do the show until he croaks (probably after missing an Inspiration Putt*) and then Fremantle will have to decide what to do with absolutely no Seal Of Approval.
[/quote]

I don't know, for some reason I'm thinking of the end of the movie "Network."

chris319 · « **Reply #24 on:** June 25, 2006, 02:54:46 AM »

Quote

But could CBS just turn around and do what they did to Rather? "Well Bob, we really appreciate you bringing all the viewership and ratings to our network.. and you've been a great asset.. BUT it's time for you to go; we're not renewing your contract. Enjoy retirement.. get out."

Did you not read what I posted before? Are you even aware that I used to work in daytime network television? First, please explain how a contract can be voided by someone who is not a party to that contract. How can a contract between Bob Barker and FremantleMedia be voided by CBS? Yes, CBS could cancel the show (which is a cash cow for them) and that would result in a gigantic P.R. gaffe: "CBS cancels TPIR because Barker won't step down".

Joe Schmoe is the head of research and development for Intel. Apple president Steve Jobs comes along and tells him, "Well ~~Bob~~ Joe, we really appreciate you bringing all the ~~viewership~~ innovation and ~~ratings~~ cutting-edge technology to our ~~network~~ products.. and you've been a great asset.. BUT it's time for you to go; we're not renewing your contract. Enjoy retirement.. get out."

Is there not something wrong with the above picture? Would the words "Blow me, Jobs, I don't have an employment contract with you" not be appropriate?

narzo · « **Reply #25 on:** June 25, 2006, 03:06:43 AM »

[quote name=\'MrGameShow\' post=\'122354\' date=\'Jun 24 2006, 11:12 AM\']
But keep in mind.. they had a whole "temp auditions" period for Rod's replacement.. but then Rich got the position.

[/quote]

you know I've had it with the way this very talented announcer has been taken to task on this board. After Johnny Olsen died there was a time where Gene Wood was fill in before an unknown named "Rod Roddy" took over.

OK kids, where is your "evidence" that Rich Fields is not qualified for this job, or at least is less qualified than someone else. Evidence being the key word, please show how his vocal talents are lesser than some other hack.

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #26 on:** June 25, 2006, 03:10:05 AM »

[quote name=\'narzo\' post=\'122428\' date=\'Jun 25 2006, 02:06 AM\']
you know I've had it with the way this very talented announcer has been taken to task on this board. After Johnny Olsen died there was a time where Gene Wood was fill in before an unknown named "Rod Roddy" took over.
[/quote]
Where's your evidence that he was "unknown"? Wasn't he the narrator on Soap?

clemon79 · « **Reply #27 on:** June 25, 2006, 03:44:16 AM »

[quote name=\'narzo\' post=\'122428\' date=\'Jun 25 2006, 12:06 AM\']
After Johnny Olsen died there was a time where Gene Wood was fill in before an unknown named "Rod Roddy" took over.
[/quote]
Um, he wasn't unknown. In the least.

Quote

please show how his vocal talents are lesser than some other hack.

He screams. (This makes him a very good match for Rikki Lake.) He doesn't know where to enunciate. I'm told his warmup is wholly unremarkabke. There were better candidates. We SAW better candidates. (One of them posts to this board.)

Blanquepage · « **Reply #28 on:** June 25, 2006, 04:24:49 AM »

Quote

He screams.

I cringe at Rich Fields' "COME ON DOOOOOOOWN!" every time Gameshow Marathon commences. It's so freaking grating.

--Jamie

Chelsea Thrasher · « **Reply #29 on:** June 25, 2006, 06:13:13 AM »

[quote name=\'narzo\' post=\'122428\' date=\'Jun 25 2006, 02:06 AM\']

you know I've had it with the way this very talented announcer has been taken to task on this board. [/quote]

If you seem to be having a problem with discussion about a game show announcer on a game show forum, there's certainly nothing forcing you to continue reading posts that apparently clash with your view of things. Last time I checked Our Beloved Executive Producing Overlords weren't holding you at gunpoint and forcing you to read the board.

[quote name=\'narzo\' post=\'122428\' date=\'Jun 25 2006, 02:06 AM\'] After Johnny Olsen died there was a time where Gene Wood was fill in [/quote]

And a list of about a half-dozen others....

[quote name=\'narzo\' post=\'122428\' date=\'Jun 25 2006, 02:06 AM\']
before an unknown named "Rod Roddy" took over.
[/quote]

Soap, for which Rod first gained any attention, debuted ten years earlier, and was well into rerun syndication at that point. A lot of people fondly remember that show, and anyone who heard more than three seconds of any of his other work could probably connect him with "the announcer on Soap". And don't forget about that little show called Press Your Luck...
-----
Initially, I admit, I didn't think Rich's TPiR work was that bad...but after two-plus years, it's getting old - he can give all the importance and gusto in the world to a toaster, then fall flat on a car in the same show. Of the announcers to try out for the job after Rod's death, Rich definitely wasn't the worst, but I can think of at least three or four who were better based on the on-air performances (yes, including the obvious one).