King World/Sony to create new game show block

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Brig Bother\' post=\'116888\' date=\'Apr 24 2006, 03:58 AM\']
You may find this illuminating.
[/quote]
I do, thank you!

It's at least _different_ enough, although I can't say the concept of the first nine questions being irrelevant and the entire game resting on the tenth one fills me with a warm fuzzy feeling. But I'm also assuming that it will make it to our shores with that format, which is not a safe assumption at all.

[Steve McClellan]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Apr 24 2006, 06:33 AM\']But I'm also assuming that it will make it to our shores with that format, which is not a safe assumption at all.[/quote]
Especially since even the Italian version doesn't bear a whole lot of resemblance to the Dutch. As far as I can tell from this Google translation, here's how Italy's goes:

This is a game played by only one couple. It begins with two safes on stage. They're asked ten questions, each with four possible answers (think Millionaire). With each correct answer, they select a money bag, containing an amount ranging from €5 to €100,000. With each incorrect answer, another safe is added to the stage.

After the ten questions, the total money is placed in one of the on-stage safes (depending on how well the couple did, there will be anywhere from two to twelve safes). They then play a game similar to Deal or No Deal - take a buyout amount, or get rid of one of the safes. Lather, rinse, repeat. Ideally, they either stop with a large buyout, or keep the safe with the cash. Otherwise, parting gifts.

So basically, the format comes here, we have no idea what the heck we'll get.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'116890\' date=\'Apr 24 2006, 06:33 AM\']
It's at least _different_ enough, although I can't say the concept of the first nine questions being irrelevant and the entire game resting on the tenth one fills me with a warm fuzzy feeling. But I'm also assuming that it will make it to our shores with that format, which is not a safe assumption at all.
[/quote]This is the sort of thing that just makes me shake my head, in much the same way as doubling the points and adding a $5,000 space to the wheel. (see earlier in this thread, I think) I understand why they're done and all, but it doesn't seem hard to create some sort of race to five right, or to a particular dollar amount.

Even so, as Chris said, it could all be for nothing anyway.

[Dbacksfan12]

Looking at the article, could someone explain what "straight barter" and "cash plus" means?

Sorry for reviving the old thread.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'124355\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 11:38 AM\']
Looking at the article, could someone explain what "straight barter" and "cash plus" means?
[/quote]
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but this is what I'm under the impression this all means:

"Straight barter" usually means that the syndicator gives you the show, and in return the syndicator gets the majority of the ad time inside of the show, usually leaving one or two local spots for the airing TV station. No actual money changes hands, the syndicator is paid by whatever they can get for the ads.

"Cash plus" is short for "cash plus barter", and it means the station pays for the show partially in cash and partially in ad time. In this case, the airing station would usually retain more ad time than they would in a straight-barter scenario.

Make sense?

[chris319]

Straight barter means a station runs all of the barter spots contained within the show and pays no money to the syndicator. Cash plus barter means a station pays the syndicator money and runs the barter spots (this would be the case with lower-rated stations where the barter spots won't reach as many viewers).

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'124358\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 11:48 AM\']
Cash plus barter means a station pays the syndicator money and runs the barter spots (this would be the case with lower-rated stations where the barter spots won't reach as many viewers).
[/quote]
Wouldn't it vary sometimes depending on the show, too? For example, I remember when Friends and Seinfeld went syndicated, and the bidding war was insane. Wouldn't those have been done on a cash-plus basis simply because they could get away with it?

[chris319]

No game show is going to command the same kind of deals as Friends, Seinfeld or even Cosby in its day. Maybe Family Feud at its apex in the '70s - early '80s but no more.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'124360\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 11:59 AM\']
No game show is going to command the same kind of deals as Friends, Seinfeld or even Cosby in its day.
[/quote]
Well, no, of course not. (Not even Wheel or Jeopardy?) I was just suggesting that some shows might go on a cash-plus system because they are so hotly sought after that they can, in addition to those cash-plus deals made with stations to offset what might be poor viewership.

[NickS]

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'124360\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 01:59 PM\']
No game show is going to command the same kind of deals as Friends, Seinfeld or even Cosby in its day. Maybe Family Feud at its apex in the '70s - early '80s but no more.
[/quote]

Depending on how much Friends was getting first cycle, I'd disagree.  Wheel gets a pretty darn good penny for its license fee, probably passing Friends and tying Seinfeld.

To add to the discussion, the station split between what is straight barter and what's cash-plus makes a world of difference.  If there's barter-only, look for the distributor to get 3.5 minutes of time and the station to get 3.5 minutes of time (not counting the usual 1.5 min. terminal break).  Cash-plus usually makes it 5.5L/1.5N, which is what Wheel and Jeopardy have for their splits.  J! daytime is a cash product, so stations also get that extra 1.5 minutes that the national side would have.

It'll be fun to see what/if any of the groups pitch game-show-wise for fall '07; I would say having the possiblity of two different game launches is something I haven't had a chance to see in my programming years.