Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Firefly cancelled!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 620873" data-attributes="member: 177"><p>Okay, I have two people to respond to. I'll take 'em one at a time.</p><p></p><p>For Whodat:</p><p></p><p>I find a fundamental inconsistency between your premises. While I'm not certain, I can accept the notion that the Neilsen system is "broken" in the sense that it is simply inaccurate and inadequate. However, given that, I find it hard to believe that the networks are really putting a lot of effort into finding out who watches what, and when. If the system is broken now, it has been so for years. If the networks really were making a good faith effort to fix it, then it would have gotten fixed. They've had the money and the time, if they really wished to apply it.</p><p></p><p>For Villano:</p><p></p><p>I'll approach your "secondly" first. Turn on most of your cable channels. Don't you see the commercials there? Most cable programming is still paid for by commercials, not by paying your monthly cable bills. </p><p></p><p>The exceptions are "premium" channels - HBO, Showtime, and the like, which commonly run without much in the way of commercial interruption. Now, isn't it interesting how their in-house productions ("The Sopranos", "Oz", "Sex in the City", "Stargate SG1" to name a few) frequently get good viewership and critical acclaim? </p><p></p><p>Now, to approach your Firsts...</p><p></p><p>Whoever said that I wanted or expected this notion to change the TV landscape? I don't care about the landscape as a whole. I'm only concerned with getting a couple of shows on the air.</p><p></p><p>As for the investors not wanting profit - people have been investing in public TV for decades, without expecting any profit or creative control. People have been paying for HBO without such expectations. Why should this be all that different?</p><p></p><p>The networks can go ahead and keep their ratings systems. This notion works <em>within</em> the system. They go ahead and figure out the ratings, and thus the value of advertising time during the show in the normal way. By reducing the cost the network has to pay for the show to near zero, we make it profitable even if the ratings are low.</p><p></p><p>I don't think that the general public would opt for such a thing. Their television wants are already met by the usual system, so they have no pressure to pay out extra cash. What I'm talking about only works when you have a whole bunch of people who are rabid about how their wants <em>aren't</em> being met, and are willing to act to fill their own wants. </p><p></p><p>All I'm saying is the we could put our money where our mouths are. If we really like a show that badly, wouldn't it be worth a measly $22 bucks a year to be able to see it?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 620873, member: 177"] Okay, I have two people to respond to. I'll take 'em one at a time. For Whodat: I find a fundamental inconsistency between your premises. While I'm not certain, I can accept the notion that the Neilsen system is "broken" in the sense that it is simply inaccurate and inadequate. However, given that, I find it hard to believe that the networks are really putting a lot of effort into finding out who watches what, and when. If the system is broken now, it has been so for years. If the networks really were making a good faith effort to fix it, then it would have gotten fixed. They've had the money and the time, if they really wished to apply it. For Villano: I'll approach your "secondly" first. Turn on most of your cable channels. Don't you see the commercials there? Most cable programming is still paid for by commercials, not by paying your monthly cable bills. The exceptions are "premium" channels - HBO, Showtime, and the like, which commonly run without much in the way of commercial interruption. Now, isn't it interesting how their in-house productions ("The Sopranos", "Oz", "Sex in the City", "Stargate SG1" to name a few) frequently get good viewership and critical acclaim? Now, to approach your Firsts... Whoever said that I wanted or expected this notion to change the TV landscape? I don't care about the landscape as a whole. I'm only concerned with getting a couple of shows on the air. As for the investors not wanting profit - people have been investing in public TV for decades, without expecting any profit or creative control. People have been paying for HBO without such expectations. Why should this be all that different? The networks can go ahead and keep their ratings systems. This notion works [i]within[/i] the system. They go ahead and figure out the ratings, and thus the value of advertising time during the show in the normal way. By reducing the cost the network has to pay for the show to near zero, we make it profitable even if the ratings are low. I don't think that the general public would opt for such a thing. Their television wants are already met by the usual system, so they have no pressure to pay out extra cash. What I'm talking about only works when you have a whole bunch of people who are rabid about how their wants [i]aren't[/i] being met, and are willing to act to fill their own wants. All I'm saying is the we could put our money where our mouths are. If we really like a show that badly, wouldn't it be worth a measly $22 bucks a year to be able to see it? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Firefly cancelled!
Top