Author Topic: What is a good run? (Read 6823 times)

Jimmy Owen · « **on:** August 20, 2003, 02:23:32 PM »

What do you guys think is the lowest threshold to be considered \"a good run\" for a traditional five-day-a-week series?

cmjb13 · « **Reply #1 on:** August 20, 2003, 02:31:39 PM »

5 years

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #2 on:** August 20, 2003, 03:27:55 PM »

As long as \"lowest threshold\" is part of the consideration, I've always considered three years to be a decent run. The vast majority don't make it that far, and there are several shows (Press Your Luck, Davidson's Squares, Three on a Match, Eye Guess) that certainly deserve to be considered \"good\" runs.

whampyl03 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 20, 2003, 04:56:23 PM »

I think....

Less than ½ years: Awful
½-1 year: Not too good
1-2 years: Ehhh... OK.
2-3 years: Good Run
3-5 years: Great Run
5-beyond: Excellent Run

catkins522 · « **Reply #4 on:** August 20, 2003, 06:46:17 PM »

[quote name=\'whampyl03\' date=\'Aug 20 2003, 03:56 PM\'] I think....

Less than ½ years: Awful
½-1 year: Not too good
1-2 years: Ehhh... OK.
2-3 years: Good Run
3-5 years: Great Run
5-beyond: Excellent Run [/quote]

Quote

I think....

Less than ½ years: Awful
½-1 year: Not too good
1-2 years: Ehhh... OK.
2-3 years: Good Run
3-5 years: Great Run
5-beyond: Excellent Run

So, do you think that \"Shop til You Drop\"(7+ years) and \"Supermarket Sweep\"(7+ years) is a EXCELLENT RUN while \"WWtBaM?\" (ABC)(2-3 years) is a GOOD RUN?

I think you don't have the episodes down. You also need a host/producer that will work/fix with the show AND audience support AND a network will get a GOOD/GREAT slot

StYD and SS had the episodes. However, there were cable game shows. So, there were little/no support. WWtBaM? had a good slot, one of the Big 3 were on their side. However, there were on EVERY DAY (5 days). So, there lost 3/4 of the audience and got canned and went to SYD.

That's why # of years isn't the key for a run. It's all four to make you work.

Charles Atkins

SplitSecond · « **Reply #5 on:** August 20, 2003, 07:16:40 PM »

Quantity doesn't imply quality.

Brandon Brooks · « **Reply #6 on:** August 20, 2003, 07:27:55 PM »

Quote

So, do you think that \"Shop til You Drop\"(7+ years) and \"Supermarket Sweep\"(7+ years) is a EXCELLENT RUN while \"WWtBaM?\" (ABC)(2-3 years) is a GOOD RUN?

Sure. STYD and Sweep have had excellent runs, and WWtBaM? has had a good run so far. Why would you disagree?

Quote

I think you don't have the episodes down. You also need a host/producer that will work/fix with the show AND audience support AND a network will get a GOOD/GREAT slot

Now I see. What does this have to do with whether a show has had a good run or not?

Quote

StYD and SS had the episodes. However, there were cable game shows. So, there were little/no support. However, there were on EVERY DAY (5 days). So, there lost 3/4 of the audience and got canned and went to SYD.

That's why # of years isn't the key for a run. It's all four to make you work.

This logic escapes me. A good run is a good run whether you liked the show or not.

Brandon Brooks

catkins522 · « **Reply #7 on:** August 20, 2003, 08:12:07 PM »

[quote name=\'whampyl03\' date=\'Aug 20 2003, 03:56 PM\'] I think....

Less than ½ years: Awful
½-1 year: Not too good
1-2 years: Ehhh... OK.
2-3 years: Good Run
3-5 years: Great Run
5-beyond: Excellent Run [/quote]

Quote

This logic escapes me. A good run is a good run whether you liked the show or not.

So, Blockbusters (Cullen's version, 1 1/2 year) and Click (1 year) sucks, if I follow you. I think Blockbusters is a good, almost great run and Click is a good run. The Newlywed Game and The Dating Game sucks, but on your rating, these are excellent runs.

You have your opinion and I will have mine.

Charles

beatlefreak84 · « **Reply #8 on:** August 20, 2003, 08:20:17 PM »

Quote

So, Blockbusters (Cullen's version, 1 1/2 year) and Click (1 year) sucks, if I follow you. I think Blockbusters is a good, almost great run and Click is a good run. The Newlywed Game and The Dating Game sucks, but on your rating, these are excellent runs.

Yes, they were excellent runs. You have to look at these shows from the normal TV watcher's perspective, and they are probably 10 times more likely to remember the Newlywed Game and the Dating Game than they are Click and Blockbusters.

While I will agree with you that the latter two shows are definitely better than the former two in terms of quality, in the TV world, it's quantity that makes a big deal (otherwise, why would ABC have even fathomed a permanent three-night-a-week run of Millionaire?).

Quote

You have your opinion and I will have mine.

Of course! My opinion: A show has to be on long enough where mere mention of it to many people will get reactions of, \"Oh, yeah; I remember that show!\" You can't get that with Blockbusters or Click, but you will get that with Dating and Newlywed! I don't know if it can be measured in years, but I'd say any show that can last past the first year must be doing at least something right, and any show that makes it past 3 is definitely doing something right!

Anthony

P.S. Oh, and BTW, Click ran for 2 years, not one (though the second season sucked, if you ask me).

LA the DJ · « **Reply #9 on:** August 20, 2003, 08:20:23 PM »

Nobody's said that good runs = good shows. I mean, I've considered Wheel and J! nearly unwatchable the last few years, yet they're still here. We all know that sometimes a good show doesn't have a good run, and sometimes lousy shows are on forever. ***prays they never make it to a fifth season of American Idol***
and for the record...
TPiR's 32 year run = a GODLY run

catkins522 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 20, 2003, 08:37:26 PM »

Quote

***prays they never make it to a fifth season of American Idol***

Hate to burst your bubble, Simon Cowell has signed a contract for the next three years. I hope that the younger tv crowd will turn the channel.

Charles Atkins

Brandon Brooks · « **Reply #11 on:** August 20, 2003, 08:47:57 PM »

[quote name=\'catkins522\' date=\'Aug 20 2003, 07:12 PM\'] So, Blockbusters (Cullen's version, 1 1/2 year) and Click (1 year) sucks, if I follow you. I think Blockbusters is a good, almost great run and Click is a good run. The Newlywed Game and The Dating Game sucks, but on your rating, these are excellent runs.

You have your opinion and I will have mine.

Charles [/quote]
You are putting words into my mouth, as the word \"sucks\" is no where in the scale perscribed by whampyl03. If you would look at the scale, both shows had \"okay\" runs. And they did have \"okay\" runs. However, Blockbusters was an excellent show; I didn't like Click. But the point you are again missing is one made in this thread by Mr. SplitSecond (damn, I don't know his real name): Quantity does not equal quality. Many excellent shows die young. When you get this false correlation out of your head, you'll probably understand where I'm coming from.

You may have your opinion, but it is horribly flawed.

Brandon Brooks

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #12 on:** August 20, 2003, 10:43:05 PM »

I said I thought this thread was going to be arbitrary, but I didn't think it would become THIS arbitrary.

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.

So yes, by that standard, Supermarket Sweep and Shop Til You Drop have had better (that is to say \"longer\") runs than WWTBAM. According to the one condition, that's simply a fact. Obviously, by virtually ever other conceivable standard, WWTBAM is the more significant show. Likewise, most of us here would agree that Blockbusters is a better show than The Dating Game. But its run -- its length of time on the air -- is simply, verifiably a lot shorter.

LA the DJ · « **Reply #13 on:** August 20, 2003, 11:53:47 PM »

[quote name=\'catkins522\' date=\'Aug 20 2003, 07:37 PM\']

Quote

***prays they never make it to a fifth season of American Idol***

Hate to burst your bubble, Simon Cowell has signed a contract for the next three years. I hope that the younger tv crowd will turn the channel.

Charles Atkins [/quote]
Well, I believe Regis has a contract that went a year past how long WWTBAM actually lasted.
It sickens me that the guy who formed the Spice Girls is making as much as he is now...

Brandon Brooks · « **Reply #14 on:** August 21, 2003, 12:04:01 AM »

Quote

It sickens me that the guy who formed the Spice Girls is making as much as he is now...

Why does it sicken you? He's mighty smart, and he demands kudos for creating such a multi-million dollar pop group. He created something good at the time.

However, it might not be so good for Paula and Randy. They may be replaced. They both asked for a substantial raise when they found out that Simon was to be paid almost ten times as them per show for the upcoming season. I heard one of the replacements considered may be Belinda Carlisle; forgot the other woman's name.

Brandon Brooks