The Game Show Forum

The Game Show Forum => Game Show Channels & Networks => Topic started by: dad1153 on March 12, 2006, 05:06:57 PM

Title: The Not-So Amazing Race...
Post by: dad1153 on March 12, 2006, 05:06:57 PM: According to www.tvgude.com (http://\"http://www.tvguide.com\") 'The Amazing Race' repeats on GSN will be downgraded to a single showing per week (Saturdays at 10PM)[/u] starting next week. The primetime schedule will be filled with (guess what?) more showings of Dog Eat Dog, Greed and Weakest Link (with George Gray instead of Anne, thank heaven for small favors).

Maybe this explains Valentine quitting, and may soon explain Rich Cronin's ouster from GSN. First American Dream Derby wipes out the network's first profits since it started. Now TAR becomes an expensive $6.5 million experiment about the viability of repeating good reality TV shows instead of bad one's (i.e. Mole, Average Joe, etc.). What do you know, turns out ratings for TAR on GSN and Survivor on OLN were just as bad as the ratings for Fear Factor in syndication or FX.

Needless to say the natives over at the GSN Board's tribe are restless and filled with 'I told you so' bravado (and who can blame them?): http://www.gsn.com/buzz/showthread.php?p=1...d=1#post1040217 (http://\"http://www.gsn.com/buzz/showthread.php?p=1040217&posted=1#post1040217\").
Title: The Not-So Amazing Race...
Post by: The Pyramids on March 12, 2006, 05:17:16 PM: I don't know why. I was have been great if the show had boosted the networks fortunes.
Title: The Not-So Amazing Race...
Post by: tvwxman on March 12, 2006, 06:04:21 PM: [quote name=\'PaulD\' date=\'Mar 12 2006, 05:17 PM\'] I was have been great if the show had boosted the networks fortunes.
[snapback]112575[/snapback]
[/quote]

Try that again, sport. Even Iris couldnt understand what you're trying to say.
Title: The Not-So Amazing Race...
Post by: ilb4ever2000 on March 12, 2006, 06:44:54 PM: [quote name=\'tvwxman\' date=\'Mar 12 2006, 06:04 PM\'][quote name=\'PaulD\' date=\'Mar 12 2006, 05:17 PM\'] I was have been great if the show had boosted the networks fortunes.
[snapback]112575[/snapback]
[/quote]

Try that again, sport. Even Iris couldnt understand what you're trying to say.
[snapback]112579[/snapback]
[/quote]

He meant "IT WOULD have been great if the show had boosted the networks fortunes." Took me about three seconds to figure that out...
Title: The Not-So Amazing Race...
Post by: CaseyAbell on March 14, 2006, 09:08:48 AM: Amazing Race boosted GSN's prime time ratings noticeably in July and August, when the show was fresh. The demos even got younger, which is, well, amazing for GSN. This network usually skews older than most hills.

The effect wore off, though, which does tend to reinforce the cliche that reality doesn't repeat well. Or, more accurately, multi-episode serials don't repeat well. Most viewers just aren't willing to commit to many hours of watching a series when they know the outcome.

As for the price tag, it will hardly bankrupt the network. Unfortunately Liberty no longer breaks out GSN in their financials, but the network was taking in about $90 million a year at last report. Amazing Race was a major commitment, but amortizing the price tag over the four years of the deal makes it bearable for the network, even if the show is no longer a ratings winner for them.

My guess is that Amazing Race will be back on a more regular basis some time in the future. No question the new prime time schedule after Millionaire is something of a patchwork, with the cash-game poker series getting a lot of exposure. I kinda like that poker show, despite A.J. Benza. It's a little more offbeat and fun than the usual tournament shows.

Greed never dies, does it? (The show, not the vice.) This show has always been a personal favorite of mine, an interesting quizzer that deserved a better fate. It would be nice if GSN could pursuade the rights holders to allow the network to make an original version with lower payouts. The show is obviously a placeholder, but your guess is as good as mine as to what will eventually fill the place.

One thing's for sure: the schedule is now the most traditional it's been since GSN started broadening its programming two years ago. The schedule, including prime time, is completely dominated by traditional studio gamers.
Title: The Not-So Amazing Race...
Post by: Jimmy Owen on March 14, 2006, 09:38:27 AM: I've never considered WL, DED or Greed to be traditional studio games. If anything, they were touted as being a break from the traditional game show. A new, meaner type of game show with sinister overtones. Perhaps the passage of time has made them "traditional."
Title: The Not-So Amazing Race...
Post by: Shredder on March 14, 2006, 09:41:03 AM: Personally, I'm glad. Amazing Race, while arguably the best reality show out there, gets boring just like other reality shows after multiple viewings...I'm surprised it lasted this long.

Personally, I just wish that GSN would put a sizeable budget to NEW versions of classic game shows. Press Your Luck with a Decent Budget(No Years supply of M and M's as a prize), Pyramid with a more colorful, less millionairish set. Maby even a new version of price is right, with new host, new set, and completly new games just to see if it could fly.

Bring over Richard Karns fued. Put stuff on that hasn't been seen in a while and give other shows a break. I'd like to see Bumper Stumpers again, or Scrabble.

There's so many things they could be doing but arn't. Oh, and get RID of any insurance commercial, ambulance chasing lawyer commercials, and anything with Wilford Brimley..
Title: The Not-So Amazing Race...
Post by: CaseyAbell on March 14, 2006, 09:41:32 AM: I can sort of see the argument for Dog Eat Dog not being a traditional gamer, even though I disagree. It's just Beat the Clock on steroids, with an occasional quizzer thrown in.

But WL and Greed? If those shows aren't traditional studio game shows, I don't know what would qualify as a traditional gamer.

By the way, if GSN got rid of its old-skewing commercials, the network would have a whole lot less money coming in. With its very old demos, the network really needs those ads to stay in business.

EDIT: I mentioned that Liberty no longer breaks out GSN in its financials. I checked Liberty's annual SEC report for 2005, posted last week, to see if maybe they started giving numbers on the network again.

No luck, but this warning showed up again:

"GSN's affiliation agreements provide for payments based on the number of subscribers that receive GSN's services and expire between now and 2008. GSN is currently out of contract with DirecTV, a distributor that accounts for approximately 25% of GSN's current subscriber base, and is in negotiations for the renewal of such contract. For the year ended December 31, 2005, GSN earned 14% of its total revenue from Comcast and 11% of its total revenue from DirectTV."

I first remember this warning on DirectTV from over a year ago. GSN still hasn't renegotiated this vital contract? Hm, sounds like something that should get done real quick.
Title: The Not-So Amazing Race...
Post by: Jimmy Owen on March 14, 2006, 10:07:09 AM: One thing I've wondered is how does GSN get paid for the infomercials they run? Is it per-inquiry or some other way? The reason I ask is that many cable systems (and the home dish companies from what i"ve heard) cover GSN's infomercials with their own infomercials. I would think that would affect pricing somewhat.

I'd rather have game shows overnight with total cable or dish clearance with the usual 30 and 60 sec commercials.