GSN's new sked starting June 14th......

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'May 14 2004, 01:04 PM\'] My only guess is that they actually do squeeze a few pennies out of the carriers and those few pennies cover the minimal production costs.

 [/quote]
 As far as Nick GAS is concerned; I'm convinced the MLS, PBA, etc. are paying for those segments during commercials.

[Jimmy Owen]

Well, maybe I can try a different approach.  Instead of calling it GSN2, perhaps call it "The 70's Channel: For people who remember the '70's and who are now in their '70's."  It would not be ad supported but a closed circuit channel where the cash would come from retirement communities and convelescent homes who would pay GSN for the service for their residents. Sony would at least get some use out of their library.  It doesn't have to be all game shows, either.  After each 2 hour block of games, there would be an hour of "My Little Margie" and "I Married Joan."

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'Brandon Brooks\' date=\'May 15 2004, 06:44 PM\'] Alright, you're becoming circular, and it's not that you don't understand, you don't want to.  I already answered this question with what I think is a viable answer. Whether you agree with the reasoning or not is your choice.  Again, networks such as Nick GAS, MTV2, VH-1 Hits, VH-1 Soul, Toon Disney, etc. are around and I can almost assure you that their ratings are not that good when compared to their parent channels.  While GSN2 is likely not to happen in the near future, the point is that it could, even if you don't understand how anyone could watch such a channel. [/quote]
 This valid argument is getting dangerously close to being personal, so I urge everybody to be a little more careful with their choice of words.

Meanwhile, I thought I already made the counter response to Brandon's point myself.  Nick GAS, MTV2, VH-1 Hits, VH-1 Soul and Toon Disney (to use every single one of your examples) either own their programs or pay very little for them, so the cost of operating such channels is relatively small.  Sony owns a handful of properties, but not nearly enough to program a round-the-clock GSN2.

Also, Toon Disney is owned by...well...Disney, and all the others are owned by Viacom.  Both are MAJOR players in cable television and have the clout to make cable operators carry their fringe stuff in a way that Sony does not.

Finally, these secondary channels are backups to some of the most fundamental basics of cable television.  MTV, Nickelodeon, Disney and (to a lesser extent) VH-1 are cable television brand-name standards.  GSN is not.

These are three real, valid, impersonal reasons why a GSN2 isn't realistic, and there are other reasons as well.  I've yet to see anyone address any of those points, I've just seen people say that no matter what the evidence, Sony could do a GSN2 if they wanted to.  Sony is big enough to try to do anything if it wanted to.  But I'd sure like to see some real, valid arguments about why it would make any economic sense at all for them to try this, and I really don't think I've seen them on this thread.

[CaseyAbell]

I agree with everything Matt says, which could be a sign that the world has gone crazy...or sane...or at least different.

Anyway, what people overlook is that the vanity channels always seem to have a highly rated parent channel pushing them on the system operators. Nick GAS has (now split) Nicklelodeon, EPSNwhatever has ESPN, the video channels have MTV, etc.

GSN2 would have GSN as its parent. And most system operators regard GSN as a two-bit, low-rated, bad-demo channel for old folks. So what leverage does GSN possess to force GSN2 onto the systems?

Short answer: none. So the odds are enormously against launching a new channel of mostly forgotten game shows. I can't even see GSN getting much carriage for the interactive gaming channel they're talking about, though that may be a slightly easier sell. Other programmers are talking about gameplay on teevee as a possibility, at least.

Down the road it may be so cheap and easy to launch a teevee channel - as cheap and easy, say, as launching a web board - that this argument won't apply. But for now it's a show-stopper.

[tyshaun1]

[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 16 2004, 09:42 AM\'] I agree with everything Matt says, which could be a sign that the world has gone crazy...or sane...or at least different.

Anyway, what people overlook is that the vanity channels always seem to have a highly rated parent channel pushing them on the system operators. Nick GAS has (now split) Nicklelodeon, EPSNwhatever has ESPN, the video channels have MTV, etc.

GSN2 would have GSN as its parent. And most system operators regard GSN as a two-bit, low-rated, bad-demo channel for old folks. So what leverage does GSN possess to force GSN2 onto the systems?

Short answer: none. So the odds are enormously against launching a new channel of mostly forgotten game shows.

Down the road it may be so cheap and easy to launch a teevee channel - as cheap and easy, say, as launching a web board - that this argument won't apply. But for now it's a show-stopper. [/quote]
 Just one question, Casey: How do you know what cable operators think of GSN? Did you ask them?

Tyshaun

[CaseyAbell]

You could take a peek at the Adlink demos and get a real good idea of what operators think of GSN. The channel skews old, female and lower-income.

Life ain't fair and there's nothing morally wrong with these demos. But most people in the teevee business aren't thrilled with that viewer profile because it limits advertising possibilities pretty severely.

[tyshaun1]

[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 16 2004, 09:50 AM\'] You could take a peek at the Adlink demos and get a real good idea of what operators think of GSN. The channel skews old, female and lower-income.

Life ain't fair and there's nothing morally wrong with these demos. But most people in the teevee business aren't thrilled with that viewer profile because it limits advertising possibilities pretty severely. [/quote]
 There are several other channels that have heavily skewed (sometimes poorly skewed) dempgraphics, that's what niche channels tend to do. But that doesn't mean the operator thinks less of the channel, especially since you didn't answer the question.

Tyshaun

[Jimmy Owen]

So, I guess the best hope for a GSN2 would be if Viacom or ABC/Disney bought GSN.  Then there would be leverage with cable operators, etc.  In the near future, might there be an indivdualized pay-per-view system where you call your cable company, ask them to rack up "Whew!" episode #153 and go from there, since it has been discussed that there is no market for game show DVDs and alternatives to GSN?

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'May 16 2004, 10:59 AM\'] There are several other channels that have heavily skewed (sometimes poorly skewed) dempgraphics, that's what niche channels tend to do. But that doesn't mean the operator thinks less of the channel, especially since you didn't answer the question. [/quote]
 Parsing the precise wording of an argument is a weak way to make a point.  If I was a cable operator, I'd personally be very fond of GSN, of course, because I like game shows.  There may very well be quite a few cable operators who are personally fond of GSN.  

The fact remains that GSN actually is a low-rated, bad-demo channel, and any cable operator who would let his personal opinion blind himself to that fact probably wouldn't remain a cable operator very long.

Jimmy Owen said:

So, I guess the best hope for a GSN2 would be if Viacom or ABC/Disney bought GSN.

Something like that.  Or FOX, or NBC Universal.  None of those are very likely either, of course.  One of us could win the lottery (I'm thinking a multi-state one), buy up a lot of libraries and make a deal with Direct TV too.  As long as we're dealing within the framework of what is possible in a world of limitless possibilities.

[CaseyAbell]

Of course, Matt is correct. (Hey, I can kiss up to the guy in charge!) I have no idea if the people who make decisions at cable and satellite systems are personally fans of game shows or not. But they don't get paid to put personal faves on their systems. They get paid to put stuff on their screens that will get the best numbers and demos.

GSN does okay as a niche cabler, but it still reaches just over 50 million households in the country. The big cable nets reach 80 million of so. That's a pretty telling indicator that the systems aren't clamoring for GSN.

On the other hand, I'm actually a little surprised that GSN has been able to grow its household availability as much as it has. Sooner or later technology may reach a tipping-point where just about any programming that appeals to more than three people might get a place on cable and satellite systems, because places could be virtually unlimited. The Internet-ization of teevee, you might call it.

That's when GSN2 stands a chance. That's when the Match Game Network might stand a chance, with a MGN2 spinoff that only features non-Dawson episodes. Or Game Show Forum Live could be on television, which is a pretty sobering thought.

But we ain't there yet.

[dzinkin]

[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 16 2004, 07:38 PM\'] Or Game Show Forum Live could be on television, which is a pretty sobering thought. [/quote]
 Shhh!  You're not supposed to blab about Matt's summer replacement for "Quizbusters." :-D

[tyshaun1]

I just realized GSN's been stuck at the 50-55 million mark ever since Rich Cronin took over. That indicates that even the network hasn't done much to push for broader coverage over the past couple of years, which usually means that TPTB aren't happy with the network itself. So if the suits aren't pleased, that makes a GSNPlus or GSN2 less than likely. Now excuse me, I have to go parse some more.
 
Tyshaun

[PeterMarshallFan]

[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 16 2004, 07:38 PM\'] Or Game Show Forum Live could be on television, which is a pretty sobering thought.

 [/quote]
Casey, I guess you didn't get the confidentiality memo....now I'll get to move up from announcer to host because you violated the agreement.

Where's Randy? ;-)

[whampyl03]

I guess I'll toss in my 2¢ in for the scheduling moves that caught my eye the most...

Fake-A-Date is gone completely

Well, I've never watched F-A-D whatsoever, but my Mom has, (Who, by the way, is a gigantic dating show connoisseur.) and she really didn't like the show. (And this is coming from somebody who likes just about anything closely related to a dating show.)

I'll take her word for it.  Good move for now, at least.

$100,000 Pyramid is out

I'll go out on a limb and say that this could be a blessing in disguise.  $100,000 Pyramid was LONG overdue for a rest, and now will finally get it.  But for how long?

Star Search weekdays @ 11AM and 7PM

Hmm. Interesting.  If this is only the most recent run, we could very well see some runintheground-itis.  Could be a good move IF both classic and recent version are in the mix, though.

Dog Eat Dog weekdays @ 9pm

How many episodes of Dog Eat Dog have been taped?  If this isn't a future case of a show that will be quickly ran into the ground, I don't know what is.

Street Smarts weekdays @ 11PM, 9PM Saturdays

Now this would be a good move.  Heck, considering the number of seasons taped, and the number of episodes picked up, I'd run it twice a day.

Overall:[/i][/u]

The Pros:

• PYL is not going anywhere yet!  YIPPIE! (Same can be said for BTC, CS, BB, and TANLMAD)
• Overall, good schedule placement for Street Smarts.
• The departure of F-A-D.

The Ehhh‘s:

• $100,000 Pyramid getting a much deserved rest. But for how Long?

The Cons:

• Too many possible candidates for the next show to be too quickly ran into the ground.

The Bottom Line
Could be worse, I guess.  Still won't be watching GSN more than 3 hours a week, though.

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'May 16 2004, 07:46 PM\'] [quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 16 2004, 07:38 PM\'] Or Game Show Forum Live could be on television, which is a pretty sobering thought. [/quote]
Shhh!  You're not supposed to blab about Matt's summer replacement for "Quizbusters." :-D [/quote]
 "Summer replacements" are so old-fashioned.  We choose instead to strategically repurpose previously aired epiosdes.