The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: MikeK on November 03, 2006, 09:22:24 PM
-
http://www.variety.com/article/VR111795328...yid=14&cs=1 (http://\"http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117953285.html?categoryid=14&cs=1\")
Will the ghost of Jackie Gleason show up on FOX this Wednesday to apologize?
-
[quote name=\'MikeK\' post=\'136830\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 09:22 PM\']
http://www.variety.com/article/VR111795328...yid=14&cs=1 (http://\"http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117953285.html?categoryid=14&cs=1\")
Will the ghost of Jackie Gleason show up on FOX this Wednesday to apologize?
[/quote]
Well, damn...just when I was starting to get into the show.
/All one episode of it.
This wasn't a prime-time multi-million dollar game show. It was a half-hour daytime or syndicated show that should be played for no more than $25,000. I liked the show, but the pacing was horrible, as was the timeslot. Come on, "Lost" and "Criminal Minds", and I think one of the 17 "Law and Orders" (can't remember)? FOX didn't have any faith in this, and this makes a perfect excuse for them "cancelling" it, or whatever they wanna call it.
Oh well, what the hell...
RIP
The Rich List
November 1, 2006-November 1, 2006
9:00 to 10:00 pm EST
-
This might have worked better in cable. I hope Eamonn gets another US game show gig sometime, like maybe with the new version of "The Joker's Wild"?
-
[quote name=\'bandit_bobby\' post=\'136836\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 10:46 PM\']
This might have worked better in cable. I hope Eamonn gets another US game show gig sometime, like maybe with the new version of "The Joker's Wild"?
[/quote]
Don't count on it! ;)
John
-
If this is full-out cancellation, then it's a little undeserving. Sure it wasn't awe-inspiring like Deal or 1vs100, but it wasn't utter crap. I'm willing to bet being getting no press and coming on right after a World Series barely anyone watched didn't help.
/It was better than The One, though
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'136839\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 10:01 PM\']
If this is full-out cancellation, then it's a little undeserving. Sure it wasn't awe-inspiring like Deal or 1vs100, but it wasn't utter crap. I'm willing to bet being getting no press and coming on right after a World Series barely anyone watched didn't help.
/It was better than The One, though
[/quote]
Yeah...if people (like myself) would have watch the WS, there probably would have been a greater viewership for the show. They were promo-ing the heck out of the show then.
/missed the episode...drat!
//AGTOYT/YSI? (new lingo...anybody got that on YouTube/YouSendIt?)
-
For what it's worth, the web site for The Rich List is gone. I didn't see the one episode, so I hope I get a chance to see it at some point; I'm sure the show wasn't that much worse than last year's surprisingly highly rated premiere of Deal or No Deal, but this was a tougher time to launch the show. I've heard generally positive feedback on Eamonn, so hopefully he'll get a chance to do another show over here.
As I haven't seen it, I'm reluctant to comment, but from what I've seen of the format & heard, it sounds like this kind of show that might indeed be more successful outside of primetime.
-
And now the ugly little loophole in game show production: If it doesn't air, we don't have to pay you.
How many people who made themselves some easy money on those lightweight questions aren't going to see their winnings?
-
I hope it's just shelved temporarily and not canceled permanently. Like most everyone else said, it was a good show, it just needs to be put on a lower scale.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'136845\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 10:19 PM\']
And now the ugly little loophole in game show production: If it doesn't air, we don't have to pay you.
How many people who made themselves some easy money on those lightweight questions aren't going to see their winnings?
[/quote]
How many episodes were produced, and I wonder if FOX plans to burn them off during the summer, despite shelving it. I believe they did that with one of their comedies from last year ("Head Cases", maybe?)
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'136847\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 10:29 PM\']
How many episodes were produced, and I wonder if FOX plans to burn them off during the summer, despite shelving it. I believe they did that with one of their comedies from last year ("Head Cases", maybe?)
[/quote]
You gotta love FOX, they hype it as 'The Biggest sensation from Britian' since Who Wants to Be a Millionare. It hasn't even aired in the U.K. yet.
Interestingly, they actually aired show #2, not show #1. Eamonn has another show on the BBC called Sudo-Q, which is a combination of trivia and solving Sudoku puzzles against time. This would make a nice little daytime show here, but even the Brits know this is a limited-audience show. Top prize is four figures.
--Mike
-
From an article online via the Orlando Sentinel:
Fox's "The Rich List," a game show, managed a paltry 4.1 million for its debut.
Might have helped if it weren't on opposite CBS' Criminal Minds and the ABC Lost episode where Eko bites the dust. Sure am glad I taped the one ep.
-
[quote name=\'MikeK\' post=\'136830\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 09:22 PM\']Will the ghost of Jackie Gleason show up on FOX this Wednesday to apologize?[/quote]
No, just the ghost of Marissa Cooper. :-)
-
It's just as well FOX "apparently" ditched The Rich List as it stands right now. This definitely screams the 2006 version of "You're In The Picture" minus a follow-up apology. Hopefully, ABC doesn't pull a FOX on me with "Show Me The Money" on Nov. 14 or I sense a bad trend here. YEESSHHH!!!
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'136846\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 07:27 PM\']
Like most everyone else said, it was a good show
[/quote]
What? What the hell board are YOU reading?
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'136847\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 10:29 PM\']
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'136845\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 10:19 PM\']
And now the ugly little loophole in game show production: If it doesn't air, we don't have to pay you.
How many people who made themselves some easy money on those lightweight questions aren't going to see their winnings?
[/quote]
How many episodes were produced, and I wonder if FOX plans to burn them off during the summer, despite shelving it. I believe they did that with one of their comedies from last year ("Head Cases", maybe?)
[/quote]
I'm thinking 10 episodes were produced, but I'm not 100 percent on that.
I could see Fox burning off the remaining episodes on Fridays at 8p once *Vanished* ends its run (Fox has told *Vanished* to wrap up its storyline in 13 episodes) and see what happens.
Oh, Eammon. Now you know what Jackie Gleason, Glenn Frey, Melba Moore, Heather Graham and those idiots from *The Will* feel.
James
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'136847\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 10:29 PM\']
How many episodes were produced, and I wonder if FOX plans to burn them off during the summer, despite shelving it. I believe they did that with one of their comedies from last year ("Head Cases", maybe?)
[/quote]
At the auditions, they said this was set to be an initial six show run.
Tim H.
-
FOX always does that, like they did with "Forever Eden" and "Playing it Straight" (just using them as examples)
-
[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'136852\' date=\'Nov 4 2006, 04:00 AM\']
but even the Brits know this is a limited-audience show.[/quote]
*Even* the Brits? Do we have delusions of grandeur or something? If anything, British shows are way, way too quiet - this week I saw someone get excited about winning £13!
Like the sig, tho.
-
How many episodes were produced?
I'm told ten.
Randy
tvrandywest.com
-
[quote name=\'davidbod\' post=\'136894\' date=\'Nov 4 2006, 11:40 AM\']
[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'136852\' date=\'Nov 4 2006, 04:00 AM\']
but even the Brits know this is a limited-audience show.[/quote]
*Even* the Brits? Do we have delusions of grandeur or something? If anything, British shows are way, way too quiet - this week I saw someone get excited about winning £13!
[/quote]
The reference is more to the fact that they are willing to produce game shows that are not mass appeal, and because of that, low dollar amounts. For example, Sudo-Q is ten times the show That's the Question is, but yet we get the latter because it (cue brass in minor-chords) doesn't have math.
--Mike
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'136832\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 10:32 PM\']
FOX didn't have any faith in this, and this makes a perfect excuse for them "cancelling" it, or whatever they wanna call it.
[/quote]
<sigh> FOX takes a game show that coulda lasted many months (if tweaked), and kills it after 1 episode. Meanwhile, klunker shows like "Trading Spouses/Meet Your New Mommy" and "The War at Home" continue to get airtime when *they* should've been canned after the first episode.
And Rupert Murdoch says his My Network TV is gonna be like another FOX in 5 years...Bwahahahaahahahaaa!
-
[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'136918\' date=\'Nov 4 2006, 01:43 PM\']
<sigh> FOX takes a game show that coulda lasted many months (if tweaked)
[/quote]
If by "tweaked" you mean "a complete format was developed around the pathetic shell of a concept", then, sure, tweaked.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'136832\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 09:32 PM\']
FOX didn't have any faith in this, and this makes a perfect excuse for them "cancelling" it, or whatever they wanna call it.
[/quote]
I don't buy this at all.
If they didn't have faith in it , then why wait till the night before the all-important November ratings book to air it? They had this one sched for the full book. If they didn't have faith, they would have waited till December to burn em off.
-
[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'136918\' date=\'Nov 4 2006, 04:43 PM\']<sigh> FOX takes a game show that coulda lasted many months (if tweaked), and kills it after 1 episode. Meanwhile, klunker shows like "Trading Spouses/Meet Your New Mommy" and "The War at Home" continue to get airtime when *they* should've been canned after the first episode.[/quote]
Maybe if they change The Rich List to a half-hour show and put "Viewer Discretion Advised" at the start? That seems to be pretty much the only thing that keeps The War at Home on the air. (Well, that and Fox needs some half-hour shows to fill in miscellaneous gaps in its schedule; they're already got 'Til Death "instant repeats" filling in King of the Hill's spot until it returns in January.)
-- Don
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'136922\' date=\'Nov 4 2006, 06:38 PM\']
I don't buy this at all.
If they didn't have faith in it , then why wait till the night before the all-important November ratings book to air it? They had this one sched for the full book. If they didn't have faith, they would have waited till December to burn em off.
[/quote]
It could very well be the network had some, limited faith in the show. I've suspected someone at Fox doesn't mind taking a chance on a game show but someone else has limited patience for them and will yank one faster than, say, a Temptation Island or The War at Home. They kept lower rated shows on their schedule when they axed Greed, for instance.
-
This is one of those formats where the only way it could work is if there's a really good host who can evoke some good conversation with the contestants and really build up the tension. Eamonn was that. However, I think even for those who did see the promos AND don't watch Lost AND were home at 9:00 on Friday night, they may have avoided it because the commercials didn't show any of Eamonn's great hosting skills. It just said "Hey, look! We turned a simple list-naming concept into an extremely over-glamorous game show!" Were I not just a game show enthusiast, I would not have tuned in. I think if more people just had their TVs tuned to Fox at that time, there would have been more viewer interest.
That being said, I hope the rest of the taped episodes will find their way to air, if for nothing else to actually let me say that programming a season pass of The Rich List on TiVo was worth something. Please also find Eamonn another spot on US television. He's arguably THE best British personality I've ever seen over here in the states.
-
[quote name=\'Patrick S\' post=\'137061\' date=\'Nov 5 2006, 08:11 PM\']
This is one of those formats where the only way it could work is if there's a really good host who can evoke some good conversation with the contestants and really build up the tension.
[/quote]
No, I'm quite sure that format would have blown dog no matter WHO the host was. It was a bad, bad, broken format.
That being said, I hope the rest of the taped episodes will find their way to air, if for nothing else to actually let me say that programming a season pass of The Rich List on TiVo was worth something.
You know that the Tivo lets you delete those, right?
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'137062\' date=\'Nov 5 2006, 11:18 PM\']
No, I'm quite sure that format would have blown dog no matter WHO the host was. It was a bad, bad, broken format.
[/quote]
Well, yeah, maybe I am giving it too much credit. I did find the show to be enjoyable, but only because of Eamonn. He had a professional demeanor that has been sorely, sorely missed in game show hosts as of late. The show format itself, as you said, leaves A LOT to be desired.
You know that the Tivo lets you delete those, right?
Of course. I was just saying that it would be nice (or, would have been nice) if my programming of the season pass wasn't a total waste. All I meant was that a season pass program ended up being nothing more than scheduling a single episode, which is unfortunate.
-
[quote name=\'Patrick S\' post=\'137067\' date=\'Nov 5 2006, 08:27 PM\']
Of course. I was just saying that it would be nice (or, would have been nice) if my programming of the season pass wasn't a total waste.
[/quote]
And I'm worrying about you if you're feeling that strongly about eight or so button presses.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'137069\' date=\'Nov 5 2006, 11:30 PM\']
And I'm worrying about you if you're feeling that strongly about eight or so button presses.
[/quote]
Geez. Apparently the art of a metaphoric expression is lost on you. Let me bring down the level of figurative language to the most basic, pedestrian, literal one possible:
It's too bad that the entire run of The Rich List ended up being one episode.
Does that make sense to you?
-
[quote name=\'Patrick S\' post=\'137072\' date=\'Nov 5 2006, 08:45 PM\']
It's too bad that the entire run of The Rich List ended up being one episode.
Does that make sense to you?
[/quote]
Yes, that makes much more sense, and I agree it's too bad, but for me it's because one episode was too many.
-
There is always FOX reality channel to burn them off.
-
[quote name=\'Terry K\' post=\'137090\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 05:05 AM\']
There is always FOX reality channel to burn them off.
[/quote]
True, and a nice idea. But isn't this an awfully big-budget show for them?
-
[quote name=\'Clay Zambo\' post=\'137097\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 06:28 AM\']
[quote name=\'Terry K\' post=\'137090\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 05:05 AM\']
There is always FOX reality channel to burn them off.
[/quote]
True, and a nice idea. But isn't this an awfully big-budget show for them?
[/quote]
Perhaps.
And the audience would be just as small, if not even smaller.
Doug
-
[quote name=\'Clay Zambo\' post=\'137097\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 05:28 AM\']
[quote name=\'Terry K\' post=\'137090\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 05:05 AM\']
There is always FOX reality channel to burn them off.
[/quote]
True, and a nice idea. But isn't this an awfully big-budget show for them?
[/quote]
The budget was one issue in the show's cancellation. As I believe Matt pointed out before, by not airing the remaining 9 episodes FOX saves on not having to pay the "winning" contestants. I'm told by one crew member who worked the 5 taping days that there were some big winners, so the savings is millions of dollars.
Randy
tvrandywest.com
-
This may be a first in U.S. television history. A show is cancelled not because of poor ratings, but to avoid having to pay contestants who won too much money on a game show.
-
[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' post=\'137116\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 11:42 AM\']
The budget was one issue in the show's cancellation. As I believe Matt pointed out before, by not airing the remaining 9 episodes FOX saves on not having to pay the "winning" contestants. I'm told by one crew member who worked the 5 taping days that there were some big winners, so the savings is millions of dollars.[/quote]
That's what I was afraid of. That has to be just about the biggest suck in the history of suckdom. I mean, everybody signs those things but no wide-eyed, eager contestant thinks for a minute that their show isn't actually going to air. Imagine for a minute winning hundreds of thousands of dollars, life-changing amounts of money, and then learning weeks later that you weren't going to get it after all.
-
There's probably a lawsuit in here. A losing one, probably, but a lawsuit nonetheless.
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'137120\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 09:28 AM\']
There's probably a lawsuit in here. A losing one, probably, but a lawsuit nonetheless.
[/quote]
I thought the same thing. And you're right, ultimately they don't have a case, but at the same time, such a case would get Fox TONS of bad pub. One has to wonder if they would be willing to pay these people they screwed a little hush-money to keep it away from the media.
-
I gotta disagree on the lawsuit angle. Let me clarify my earlier post.
The reason the Rich List is not on FOX's schedule and is apparently cancelled is because of very low ratings. Beyond that, the decision as to whether or not to air the remaining 9 episodes is likely affected by the fact that unaired game shows need not award "winnings" to its contestants. That is very likely one of the factors behind choosing whether or not to "burn off" the episodes in the can, but not a factor in the decision as to whether or not to cancel plans to tape future episodes. A hit is a hit, and a stiff is a stiff. No matter what the total of the winnings in the unaired episodes, if the show garnered ratings it would still be on.
Randy
tvrandywest.com
-
Fox is just doing what it always seems to do....tread water til American Idol and 24 start up in January...but you have to hope that they do the right thing and at least give the contestants a percentage of their winnings (because if they did end up in a lawsuit, it could get ugly...but wouldn't the production company be part of any suit as well?)
-
[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' post=\'137130\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 09:52 AM\']
I gotta disagree on the lawsuit angle. Let me clarify my earlier post.
[/quote]
I realize that, and I'm not suggesting at all that they have a case (quite the opposite, in fact), but sometimes that doesn't matter; the mere act of yelling "I won eleventy billion dollars on a game show and now they won't give it to me" is probably enough to get the media interested, since most people don't know this dirty little secret that we do; they figure if you won it, you get it, whether the shows air or not.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'137119\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 09:06 AM\']That's what I was afraid of. That has to be just about the biggest suck in the history of suckdom. I mean, everybody signs those things but no wide-eyed, eager contestant thinks for a minute that their show isn't actually going to air. Imagine for a minute winning hundreds of thousands of dollars, life-changing amounts of money, and then learning weeks later that you weren't going to get it after all.[/quote]That's one of the risks of trying out for a new unproven game show, isn't it? I wonder how many people who won a few grand on Jeopardy! in 1984 thought the same thing. Now, as long as the show rolls along, everyone gets paid, and all is right with the world.
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'137120\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 09:28 AM\']There's probably a lawsuit in here. A losing one, probably, but a lawsuit nonetheless.[/quote]Not even a losing lawsuit, because there are probably two sentences buried in the pages of documents you sign before appearing. 1) By appearing on The Show, you waive your right to sue, and 2) If your episode of The Show doesn't air, we owe you nothing.
I got rid of the book months ago, but I bet you could find it on Amazon.com or eBay, or something. Anyway, David Wagner got on a handful of game shows in the 1980s, and thought he could parlay his "expertise" into a book, and in one chapter he went over a possible scenario that's very similar to what happened here: you get on episode 13 of "Whistle or Lose it!" and win the grand prize! Yay, good on ya and start packing for Hawaii!
Or not. The show is cancelled after two weeks because the whistling is upsetting large numbers of dogs. No trip for you, Chief, and there's Not One Thing you can do about it.
Any case brought before a judge would be tossed on summary judgment. I hope that FOX at least gave their contestants a little help with travel costs and lodging because it's the right thing to do. After all, if a contestant on show seven goes to the AP and says "I didn't get paid when I went on a cancelled game show!" the reporter is going to laugh derisively and push the 'erase' button on their voice mail recorder.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'137133\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 10:02 AM\']
After all, if a contestant on show seven goes to the AP and says "I didn't get paid when I went on a cancelled game show!" the reporter is going to laugh derisively and push the 'erase' button on their voice mail recorder.
[/quote]
Oh, I REALLY don't agree with that. This is the kind of story that tabloid television is MADE for. I have no doubt whatsoever that one of these "wronged" (and, again, I want to stress that I understand quite well that they have no legal recourse) contestants would be able to attract the interest of _someone_ in the news media. (Especially in the throes of a sweeps period.)
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'137136\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 10:07 AM\']
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'137133\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 10:02 AM\']
After all, if a contestant on show seven goes to the AP and says "I didn't get paid when I went on a cancelled game show!" the reporter is going to laugh derisively and push the 'erase' button on their voice mail recorder.
[/quote]
Oh, I REALLY don't agree with that. This is the kind of story that tabloid television is MADE for. I have no doubt whatsoever that one of these "wronged" (and, again, I want to stress that I understand quite well that they have no legal recourse) contestants would be able to attract the interest of _someone_ in the news media. (Especially in the throes of a sweeps period.)
[/quote]I hadn't thought of that angle. Now, here's something to consider. Let's say you're FOX, and Timmy the Disgruntled Contestant comes to you and says, "I won $250,000 on your show, and if I don't get paid, I'm going to squee to The Insider and Access Hollywood and anyone who will listen."
How much would it be worth to FOX to keep this sort of thing quiet, and how far along could this sort of thing go before you get into the realm of blackmail and so on.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'137136\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 01:07 PM\']
This is the kind of story that tabloid television is MADE for. I have no doubt whatsoever that one of these "wronged" (and, again, I want to stress that I understand quite well that they have no legal recourse) contestants would be able to attract the interest of _someone_ in the news media. (Especially in the throes of a sweeps period.)
[/quote]
However, the news media most likely to run with it is Fox.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'137137\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 10:11 AM\']
How much would it be worth to FOX to keep this sort of thing quiet
[/quote]
What, is there an echo in here (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=11750&view=findpost&p=137126\")?
[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'137140\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 10:54 AM\']
However, the news media most likely to run with it is Fox.
[/quote]
Touche, sir.
-
I did hear today (from a source who would definitely know) that as of right now, Fox *does* plan to return it to the schedule at "a later date."
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'137142\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 10:59 AM\']
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'137137\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 10:11 AM\']
How much would it be worth to FOX to keep this sort of thing quiet
[/quote]
What, is there an echo in here (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=11750&view=findpost&p=137126\")?[/quote]Everyone else was doing it, so I thought I'd give it a try...it's the last time that'll happen.
What I meant was if FOX were to say "Sorry your show was canned, here's $25,000 to cover your expenses and the fact that you won a few games." Some greedy person might say "Not enough, I want $150,000 or I blow the whistle on the whole operation," even if they only won $75,000 during the show. Monumentally stupid, of course, but you never know.
-
[quote name=\'cweaver\' post=\'137143\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 11:17 AM\']
I did hear today (from a source who would definitely know) that as of right now, Fox *does* plan to return it to the schedule at "a later date."
[/quote]
That wouldn't surprise me one bit. They've got nine unaired shows in the can. I've got to think that on some of those shows the contestants' winnings were relatively modest. If that is the case, they can afford to air those shows without going to the cleaners, hoping that a different night or different time slot or different alignment of the stars will make a difference in the ratings. In the meantime they can frantically rework the game and the prize structure to have fewer big-money payouts.
here's something to consider. Let's say you're FOX, and Timmy the Disgruntled Contestant comes to you and says, "I won $250,000 on your show, and if I don't get paid, I'm going to squee to The Insider and Access Hollywood and anyone who will listen."
How much would it be worth to FOX to keep this sort of thing quiet
Zero, zip, zilch, nada, nothing. Fox merely has to point to the applicable part of the agreement and it makes Timmy look like a dork who can't even read a contract he is signing.
-
[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' post=\'137130\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 12:52 PM\']
I gotta disagree on the lawsuit angle. Let me clarify my earlier post.
The reason the Rich List is not on FOX's schedule and is apparently cancelled is because of very low ratings. Beyond that, the decision as to whether or not to air the remaining 9 episodes is likely affected by the fact that unaired game shows need not award "winnings" to its contestants. That is very likely one of the factors behind choosing whether or not to "burn off" the episodes in the can, but not a factor in the decision as to whether or not to cancel plans to tape future episodes. A hit is a hit, and a stiff is a stiff. No matter what the total of the winnings in the unaired episodes, if the show garnered ratings it would still be on.[/quote]
The following is in no way intended to doubt your description of this situation, Randy, or the decency of the people involved. But this is a perfect example of a "fungible" situation. Short of trusting the people who are telling you which is which, there is no way to discern between "show cancelled due to bad ratings, episodes not burned off due to no-pay clause" and "show cancelled due to no-pay clause". It's like the eBay auctions where someone claims to be selling a shiny rock, with a "free gift" of a bunch of DVDs--except those, of course, are always blatantly obvious.
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'137164\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 04:25 PM\']
[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' post=\'137130\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 12:52 PM\']
I gotta disagree on the lawsuit angle. Let me clarify my earlier post.
The reason the Rich List is not on FOX's schedule and is apparently cancelled is because of very low ratings. Beyond that, the decision as to whether or not to air the remaining 9 episodes is likely affected by the fact that unaired game shows need not award "winnings" to its contestants. That is very likely one of the factors behind choosing whether or not to "burn off" the episodes in the can, but not a factor in the decision as to whether or not to cancel plans to tape future episodes. A hit is a hit, and a stiff is a stiff. No matter what the total of the winnings in the unaired episodes, if the show garnered ratings it would still be on.[/quote]
The following is in no way intended to doubt your description of this situation, Randy, or the decency of the people involved. But this is a perfect example of a "fungible" situation. Short of trusting the people who are telling you which is which, there is no way to discern between "show cancelled due to bad ratings, episodes not burned off due to no-pay clause" and "show cancelled due to no-pay clause". It's like the eBay auctions where someone claims to be selling a shiny rock, with a "free gift" of a bunch of DVDs--except those, of course, are always blatantly obvious.
[/quote]
I agree in general principle. But the known commodity in this case was the poor viewership of that first episode... south of 5 million viewers. There are that many sets on in American living rooms while the "viewers" are in the bathroom! ;-)
Randy
tvrandywest.com
-
Well, what do you expect when you keep talking about "unfinished business"?
-
[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' post=\'137182\' date=\'Nov 6 2006, 09:41 PM\']
I agree in general principle. But the known commodity in this case was the poor viewership of that first episode... south of 5 million viewers. There are that many sets on in American living rooms while the "viewers" are in the bathroom! ;-)
[/quote]
What FOX shold have done is at least had one more airing before pulling the plug. And if they did, they could have pulled a Deal or No Deal in which they hype to death some Big Money Spoiler, assuming there was a lot of money on the line in the next ep.
-
[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'137212\' date=\'Nov 7 2006, 06:36 AM\']
What FOX shold have done is at least had one more airing before pulling the plug.
[/quote]
....why?
And if they did, they could have pulled a Deal or No Deal in which they hype to death some Big Money Spoiler, assuming there was a lot of money on the line in the next ep.
....why?
Clearly Fox determined that they would save more money from NOT running the show than they would have made in advertising revenue by running it.
I'm not sure why so many people are going all Thad Dixon and refusing to look at the bottom line.
-
[quote name=\'MikeK\' post=\'136830\' date=\'Nov 3 2006, 09:22 PM\']
http://www.variety.com/article/VR111795328...yid=14&cs=1 (http://\"http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117953285.html?categoryid=14&cs=1\")
Will the ghost of Jackie Gleason show up on FOX this Wednesday to apologize?
[/quote]
And yet, TTD '90 and Cram got longer runs....