What is a good run?

[TheInquisitiveOne]

Swinging this back on-topic, I think that a minimum of three years can be considered a good run...especially by today's television standards. I am speaking on a totally objective level when I say this. There must be an audience out there who enjoys Supermarket Sweep and Shop 'Til You Drop, so that is all I can say about that.

I feel that if a show ran for two years, it was watchable but did not have enough appeal to go for thirds. Shows like Blockbusters (Cullen), The All-New Let's Make a Deal, and Bullseye fall under that category.

Many runs also depends on the taste of the audience to whom it is presented. For example, the Australian version of $ale of the Century went more than a decade with the Shopping Round, while we only had it for two years (One year on NBC, and one year on syndication...maybe because NBC needed a budget slash, but that is for another post). At the same time, their version of The Price is Right only had two three-year runs, with another run currently starting.

In summary, 2 years is notable, but three years is nice.

The Inquisitive One

[Jimmy Owen]

I was looking for a span of time and I was thinking three years originally, but the discussion has triggered some subjective reflection.  For a show like \"The Neighbors,\" maybe thirteen weeks was \"a good run\" because the show had reached its creative peak and had served its purpose.

[uncamark]

I've been holding off on this thread, but I think it's time to throw this in:

Mark Goodson was once quoted as saying that a game show is not really a hit until it's been on for at least five years.

By his standards, \"STYD\" and \"SS\"--both with over five years of original production in their current forms--are hits.  \"WWTBAM\" is one year away in the U.S. from being a hit, even if it's the more significant series.

Goodson's view, of course, is that staying power is the true measure of a hit game show.  Lots of formats may get initial hype but don't have the staying power to stick around (helloooooooo, \"Studs!\"   Hellooooooooo, \"WLOD!\"), while a true hit endureth forever (\"TPIR,\" come on down!).

Something to think about.

[PeterMarshallFan]

[quote name=\'TheInquisitiveOne\' date=\'Aug 21 2003, 12:49 AM\'] The All-New Let's Make a Deal [/quote]
 Monty and Stefan had agreed to end it after the second season. They just didn't want to do it anymore. [That's how I heard it]

[Ian Wallis]

I've always thought that if a show could run two years in daytime it was a good run.  For syndication (because of reruns during part of the year) the number would probably be three.

One of the best-loved shows by our group is \"Whew\".  Since it only ran a year, I guess you could say it didn't have a very good run.  However, if you look at the episodes that were produced (probably close to 300), that would be a fairly decent run if GSN were to ever pick up the show.

Since Mark Goodson stated a show had to run five years to be a genuine hit, does that mean a show that was on four years wasn't a hit?  Four years seems like a pretty good run to me!

[Jay Temple]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Aug 20 2003, 09:43 PM\']Charles is obviously defining a \"run\", at least in part, in terms of the quality of the program.  While that's certainly a valid consideration, I believe the rest of us thought Jim's initial question merely asked what length of time on the air would be sufficient for a show to have succeeded on television.  He wasn't asking about the quality of the show, whether it was on cable or even how many episodes were produced.[/quote]
If I were the producer or host of a show whose run had recently ended, I would feel that we had a respectable run if either (1) the show had lasted four years or (2) it had two full seasons and at least part of a third and it was a show I felt really proud of.  All this is regardless of whether it's a primetime show, a network daytime show, a syndie strip, a weekly syndie (for those of us who remember them) or a cable show.

Blockbusters falls just a little short of the time necessary for (2), but if had lasted thru December 1982 instead of April 1982, it would be a good illustration.  Dick Clark's $100,000 Pyramid satisfies (2), and his 10/20/25K versions all satisfy (1).