Shows that Game Show Network should get.

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'HSquares2003\' date=\'Oct 12 2003, 11:21 PM\'] If they are gonna screw up a new acquistion like they did with H2(marshall version), they should not acquire anything new for awhile. My .03 cents worth. [/quote]
 The only sense I can make out of this statement is that given the choice between 150 episodes of a rare treasure that no one had seen in decades and ZERO episodes of a rare treasure than no one had seen in decades, you would prefer zero.  Interesting.

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'Pyramid80\' date=\'Oct 12 2003, 10:23 PM\'] Shouldn't the Match Game-Hollywood Squares Hour be in the Goodson-Todman package that GSN has now?  Or is it seperate like TPIR? [/quote]
 There is a problem with the cross-ownership with Orion and Goodson-Todman.  Some have speculated that Rayburn requested them not to be rerun, but I have heard recent accounts disputing that.

[inturnaround]

[quote name=\'Dsmith\' date=\'Oct 12 2003, 10:51 PM\'] [quote name=\'Pyramid80\' date=\'Oct 12 2003, 10:23 PM\'] Shouldn't the Match Game-Hollywood Squares Hour be in the Goodson-Todman package that GSN has now?  Or is it seperate like TPIR? [/quote]
There is a problem with the cross-ownership with Orion and Goodson-Todman.  Some have speculated that Rayburn requested them not to be rerun, but I have heard recent accounts disputing that. [/quote]
Yeah, I would think that if there were to be money to be made in a property long since written off, they would do it in a heartbeat. A request by Gene Rayburn 20 years ago would probably be ignored.

No, I think it's a rights issue, plain and simple (or as plain and simple as rights issues can be). A lot of things with Orion (God bless its bankrupt little soul) had the same problem.

[NickintheATL]

Need I remind everyone again of what actually happed to Orion, they went bankrupt and was bought out by MGM, which used to be owned by Ted Turner, then broke off before Turner's holdings got absorbed by Time/Warner. MGM has all of Orion's holdings at this point.

They did go bankrupt, but MGM would be the people who GSN would talk to about the HS side of the rights nowadays.

and Zach, don't just repeat my post.... :-P

[tommycharles]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Oct 12 2003, 10:27 PM\'] [quote name=\'HSquares2003\' date=\'Oct 12 2003, 11:21 PM\'] If they are gonna screw up a new acquistion like they did with H2(marshall version), they should not acquire anything new for awhile. My .03 cents worth. [/quote]
The only sense I can make out of this statement is that given the choice between 150 episodes of a rare treasure that no one had seen in decades and ZERO episodes of a rare treasure than no one had seen in decades, you would prefer zero.  Interesting. [/quote]
 I think he's trying to say that if they're going to spend money on something and let it fly down the toilet, they would be better to save the money. Or I could be wrong and that made no sense whatsoever.

It would be something new here if someone were to think of the network, anyway. As much as some of us bash the GSN execs, I defy any of you to make a higher ratings/more profitable network relying on the relentless string of obscure (to anyone that's not a member here) titles that you seem to want.

[catnap1972]

[quote name=\'tommycharles\' date=\'Oct 13 2003, 11:50 AM\'] I think he's trying to say that if they're going to spend money on something and let it fly down the toilet, they would be better to save the money. [/quote]
 That whole statement from them about the classic Squares shows "not bringing in ratings from the desirable demographic" bothers me.  You mean the brass didn't have a clue that anyone under 30 or so probaly wouldn't even remember those shows (or many of the celebrities) beforehand?

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'catnap1972\' date=\'Oct 13 2003, 12:11 PM\'] That whole statement from them about the classic Squares shows "not bringing in ratings from the desirable demographic" bothers me.  You mean the brass didn't have a clue that anyone under 30 or so probaly wouldn't even remember those shows (or many of the celebrities) beforehand? [/quote]
 So now they're being faulted for even trying?  Look, it's real simple.  They put Hollywood Squares on the air.  It didn't give them the ratings they needed and/or wanted.  They took Hollywood Squares off the air.  

[quote name=\'tommycharles\' date=\'Oct 13 2003, 11:50 AM\'] I think he's trying to say that if they're going to spend money on something and let it fly down the toilet, they would be better to save the money. [/quote]

I have yet to see in what way they "let" HS fly down the toilet. They gave it a chance, as I recall they promoted it pretty heavily, and it didn't do for them what they wanted it to do.  So now it's not on the schedule anymore.  

That's what happens.  Shows come and go on every network all the time.  You guys still see GSN as a museum with regular, rotating exhibits ("When is Now You See It coming back?") rather than a television business trying to evolve, grow and reach more viewers.

[tommycharles]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Oct 13 2003, 11:30 AM\']
[quote name=\'tommycharles\' date=\'Oct 13 2003, 11:50 AM\'] I think he's trying to say that if they're going to spend money on something and let it fly down the toilet, they would be better to save the money. [/quote]

I have yet to see in what way they "let" HS fly down the toilet. They gave it a chance, as I recall they promoted it pretty heavily, and it didn't do for them what they wanted it to do.  So now it's not on the schedule anymore.  

That's what happens.  Shows come and go on every network all the time.  You guys still see GSN as a museum with regular, rotating exhibits ("When is Now You See It coming back?") rather than a television business trying to evolve, grow and reach more viewers. [/quote]
 I understand that they didn't do anything wrong - ok "let" was the wrong word. They experimented, and it didn't go well. Many people thought that they didn't do enough and people got sick of reruns. I don't agree with that - assuming that the members of this forum don't count as the "general" GSN viewer (and in the grand scheme of things, we don't), no one will tune in to Marshall HS and notice the secret square prize and say "oh, I've seen this one. I'll go watch Blind Date now"

People just didn't see the show as "appointment television" - not that people plan things around television, but something people watch when it's on, generally. There was absolutely nothing GSN could do, short of jump in the time machine and tell HQ to appeal more to 18-34's...

Their only fault that I can figure out without the data in front of me is not dumping it earlier. They were obviously using it as a filler after a while (which might have been for B&WO reasons, or just pure filler), and they shouldn't have left it on if there was something else to go in its place. They dump things when they get low ratings all the time (Trap, Trivia and Plus, Password). This was just a wierd occurance.

But hey, we got a show that hasn't been seen in decades for 18 months. I'm happy.

[melman1]

But if viewers are making a show "appointment television", wouldn't they have noticed the endless cycle of repeats?

I wonder if they really had 150 shows.  Seems like shows were repeated way too often for that.

FWIW, I doubt that GSN has any meaningful way to measure ratings.  (Meaningful to anyone not "in the biz", that is.)

[uncamark]

[quote name=\'catnap1972\' date=\'Oct 13 2003, 11:11 AM\'][quote name=\'tommycharles\' date=\'Oct 13 2003, 11:50 AM\'] I think he's trying to say that if they're going to spend money on something and let it fly down the toilet, they would be better to save the money. [/quote]
That whole statement from them about the classic Squares shows "not bringing in ratings from the desirable demographic" bothers me.  You mean the brass didn't have a clue that anyone under 30 or so probaly wouldn't even remember those shows (or many of the celebrities) beforehand?[/quote]
My guess is that they were hoping that the kids had heard of Paul Lynde and wanted to see him in action--after all, it seems like that there are enough people who want to see Brett, Charles and Richard in action every day--and "MG"'s success paralleled "Squares"' height of syndication success.  Remember that Lynde was featured in every single promo for the show (my favorite--"The Paul Lynde School of Comedy").

Turns out they were wrong.

[Rhudson765]

[quote name=\'Skynet74\' date=\'Sep 12 2003, 09:52 PM\'] I realize there are problems securing the rights to many programs. However if you had your wish, name some of the shows that have NEVER been on Game Show Network that you think should be.

I'll go first.

Cross-Wits
Dream House
Match Game Hollywood Squares Hour
Hitman
Whew!
the All New Dating Game
Name That Tune
Face The Music
Scrabble
Sale Of The Century
The All New Let's make A Deal
Concentration
Classic Concentration
You Bet Your Life




John [/quote]
 I realize there are problems securing the rights to many programs. However if you had your wish, name some of the shows that have NEVER been on Game Show Network that you think should be.

I'll go first.


Hitman
Whew!

Why should GSN buy the rights to two FAILED SHOWS that no one outside of thisgroup will remember?

the All New Dating Game

Why? GSN has enough Dating Game and Newlywed Game episodes.

Name That Tune
Face The Music

Why? Their treasured demo won't recognize any of the songs.

Scrabble
Sale Of The Century

Now these actually make sense. Both of these shows have long runs and one is hosted by the patron saint of GSN, Chuck Wollery.


You Bet Your Life

It would be a great addition to Black and White overnight.


John

[sshuffield70]

Tammy,

I think Wayne Cox is underrated, and should be hosting something instead of that blowhard Roberto.  Hey, "Talkabout" should be easy to revive and for more money than the original (what a concept!)

[Ian Wallis]

While I think it's interesting to see lists of shows people would like GSN to get (I've certainly got one myself), based on what's been happening with GSN lately, I wonder if we should give up hope of them ever buying another classic library?  It just seems like that's not the way they want to go.

[zachhoran]

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Oct 14 2003, 08:13 AM\'] While I think it's interesting to see lists of shows people would like GSN to get (I've certainly got one myself), based on what's been happening with GSN lately, I wonder if we should give up hope of them ever buying another classic library?  It just seems like that's not the way they want to go. [/quote]
 Cronin HAS mentioned wanting to get TPIR back, but other than that, some of the shows WE want to see that they don't yet have rights to they might not be getting anytime soon.

[Jay Temple]

[quote name=\'Rhudson765\' date=\'Oct 13 2003, 03:31 PM\'] Hitman
Whew!
 [/quote]
 How long have they been showing Win, Lose or Draw?  I don't think it ran much longer than Whew!.