Any person that found the Kanye "imma let you" finish template jokes funny is a far bigger simpleton than a person laughing at a Leno joke.

PERDOOM IM REALLY HAPPY FOR U AND IMMA LET U FINISH BUT ISTEWART HAS ONE OF THE BEST POSTS OF ALL TIME!!

there are a couple ideas around what you're saying that come to mind, but to address your post directly: the economcis of producing broadcast television network series are challenged because as you suggest above production pricepoints are unsustainable - talent costs are too high even for 1st year series, and as you note above erode margins over the lifecylcle of a series due to talent renegotaition cycles

there are other models in the US (looking at the cable networsk) and around the world (UK, Asia, latin america with telenovelas) that address the idea that you can have replaceable, cheap talent, and still drive viewers and create hits

to your point about the imporatnce of a homerun model - hm, not sure if i'm quite getting what you're saying, but in my view if the singles and doubles are unprofitable or breakeven, you need homeruns to drive any overall margins

but i do think i understand what you're generally driving at - there are ways for the network braodcast model to become more efficient - to increase value capture for the hits by lowering production and distribution costs, and decrease losses for the non hits - and every broadcast network is looking at this very carefully

another thing to note - remember, broadcast networks just don't air primetime - and right now, the state of the model is such that not only do primetime hits (the biggest driver of revenues) have to fund the losers out of the primetime development cycle, they have to help support losses in News, Sports, daytime etc.

the model is in bad shape

like, you may wonder to yourself - "why do the big 4 broadcasting networks have so many news programs in a day and age where national news and news magazines are pretty much the most commoditized content ever?"

and i would answer - GOOD QUESTION!

i thought the networks got free money from the government for having news programs - obv not stuff like dateline, but the daily local news programs.

how do you think the model will change, o ew reader extraordinaire? i.e. what will have to give?

well, the daily local news still drives viewers and has some real value in each local marketplace, i was talking more about network/national news magazines that has become very commoditized and unnecessary i think for a broadcast network

(to help define terms here - a television station in say boston, wcvb, produces its own local news and syndicates its own programming. they can choose to enter into an affiliation agreement with a broadcast network, which they have, in their case abc network - abc network provides a mix of programming to wcvb including primetime, sports, daytime, news, or about 50% of wcvb's programming - the "news" i'm talking about is the type provided by abc, so dateline which nbc provides to its station affiliates would fall into that category)

oh yeah and the tv industry is not subsidized by the government or fcc like in other countries (however, the digital spectrum allotted to each television station is in fact given to them by the FCC)

the model is changing quickly and will continue to change over time. the big questions the television industry faces are 1) whether or not 100% free tv models can exist on any platform (by free, i mean ad-supported only, so right now examples are broadcast television and hulu) 2) will the whole television model move more towards a subscription based one, 3) how will the industry respond to online video, how much of it will be free, and most importantly...

4) how to make the consumer happy, to give them even more choice, and to make the changes above largely invisible to the consumer, but still maintaining market as a content producer

basically there are alot of questions without alot of clear answers right now - the big drivers of change for tv viewing, and the types of distribution deals taking shape are 1) increased high speeed data/broadband adoption in the US and 2) increased penetration of web-enabled tvs, of which every major maker including vizio will roll out in all their next gens going forward (estimates put the number of web enabled tvs sold in the US at like 40M or something by 2013). with web enabled tvs come greater valence of services that roku, netflix, other 'ovet the top syndicators' can provide viewres etc. etc. etc.

there are very few transparent issues that can be addressed in a meaningful way right now - one of them is that braodcast network production costs are unsustainable and so that model may shed dayparts such as news, daytime etc over time and become a more focused entertainment channel

Update: I thought Leno was going to grope Jennifer Garner on national television last night.

fast ratings for monday:

10 p.m.

CBS: "CSI: Miami" season premiere (13.8 million, 8.7/14)
ABC: "Castle" season premiere (9.4 million, 6.2/10)
NBC: "The Jay Leno Show" (5.7 million, 3.8/6)

http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethe...re-monday.html

Geez, I don't know why, but it bugs me that people love CSI. Especially CSI: Miami.

I should start a new thread about how badly I hate CSI...in all its incarnations.

pretty much all CBS shows for me, except for 1 or 2.

and this is somewhat weak competition! (castle, that is)

leno did a 1.8 in A18-49 (which is what the networks sell ads against), so a couple million people who matter to the ratings watched his show

morons!

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzz,...

NBC Could Make $300 Million A Year If The Jay Leno Show Does A 1.5 Rating

I won't see this show until I randomly stumble on it - but is there more to this being a bad show besides the fact that Jay Leno is not funny?

I think this is pretty accurate stuff. My parents in law watch Leno, and they are nice people but they just aren't funny, and don't really recognize good humor either. But they're traditionalists, for sure. The reason I know they don't recognize good comedy is taht we've gone to comedy clubs several times and it is pretty obvious the kind of things they laugh at. They miss a lot of high-brow stuff, and generally prefer very obvious "comedy", which imo, isn't really funny. "Black people are different from White folks!" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAA OMG SO TRUE

But anyway we saw her dad a few days before the Leno show started and he actually asked us, in a rather excited manner, if we were gonna "be able" to catch the Leno premier. We were like "Nahhh, we...won't be able to..." lol

That number seems pretty meaningless to me, unless it's compared with how much they would normally make with scripted shows in that time slot over a year's time.

I'm pretty sure they were hemorrhaging money at 10 PM, hence the format switch, but what do I know, I don't read EW.

Agree.

When the funniest/most memorable thing you've ever said is "What the hell were you thinking?", after 17 years, that is not good. Drew Barrymore would never jump on Jay's desk and flash him - because he's not worthy of seeing titties.

i dont understand all the leno hate

Why do people care so much about the business side?

The Leno show is alot cheaper than the others so even with half the viewers it might make them more money.

this is some television agent, who likely doens' treally get network economics, saying some stupid stuff - perhaps he means "$300M improvement", which is possible from last year since NBC lost so much money at 10pm because they can't develop series in htat time slot, but definitely not $300M in operating income / profit - here is someone else's post that is pretty in line with reality (tho from quick back of the envelope i'd say that the revenue sales guess is too aggressive, and with make goods it would be lower)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/12/bu...pagewanted=all