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.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Sci-Fi et al sue NASA
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="LightPhoenix" data-source="post: 1184615" data-attributes="member: 115"><p>Well, I don't claim to be a network executive, but I'm really not sure how SFC expects to be making money when they keep putting out crappy programs, cancelling good ones, and pulling stunts when they could be putting money into advertising their own good shows instead, thereby boosting the number of viewers.</p><p> </p><p>A few years ago SFC had a pretty good Friday line-up. It worked well, and served as a good jump-off point for new shows. They even attempted to expand to another night (I think Tuesday). Then they decided to get greedy, and try and "fix" what wasn't broken. </p><p> </p><p>Among other things, around that time pretty much all advertising for <em>Farscape</em> stopped, it was moved around, and eventually cancelled when numbers weren't good enough - despite the fact that it was still consistantly one of their highest rated shows. They blamed "low numbers" on the show when in fact a combination of near non-existant advertising, a Friday night line-up (the weakest night second only to Saturday), and natural tendencies (a show's numbers almost always go down over the season) were to blame.</p><p> </p><p>Now, I'm not a network executive, but even I understand these basic principles. If they spent even half the time and money working on bolstering their line-up and advertising their channel and shows that they do with pointless crap like this, I have no doubt they would see their precious increase in viewership. Which means more money, which means more investment, which means more money.</p><p> </p><p>I can only conclude one of two things. One, that no one at that station gives a damn about sci-fi, horror, and the like. In which case, they're damned to fail anyway, especially with genres that aren't that popular on television. Two, that the executives over there have no clue what-so-ever how to run a station. Especially given actions that they have taken when they had stuff that was, for all intents and purposes, working.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="LightPhoenix, post: 1184615, member: 115"] Well, I don't claim to be a network executive, but I'm really not sure how SFC expects to be making money when they keep putting out crappy programs, cancelling good ones, and pulling stunts when they could be putting money into advertising their own good shows instead, thereby boosting the number of viewers. A few years ago SFC had a pretty good Friday line-up. It worked well, and served as a good jump-off point for new shows. They even attempted to expand to another night (I think Tuesday). Then they decided to get greedy, and try and "fix" what wasn't broken. Among other things, around that time pretty much all advertising for [i]Farscape[/i] stopped, it was moved around, and eventually cancelled when numbers weren't good enough - despite the fact that it was still consistantly one of their highest rated shows. They blamed "low numbers" on the show when in fact a combination of near non-existant advertising, a Friday night line-up (the weakest night second only to Saturday), and natural tendencies (a show's numbers almost always go down over the season) were to blame. Now, I'm not a network executive, but even I understand these basic principles. If they spent even half the time and money working on bolstering their line-up and advertising their channel and shows that they do with pointless crap like this, I have no doubt they would see their precious increase in viewership. Which means more money, which means more investment, which means more money. I can only conclude one of two things. One, that no one at that station gives a damn about sci-fi, horror, and the like. In which case, they're damned to fail anyway, especially with genres that aren't that popular on television. Two, that the executives over there have no clue what-so-ever how to run a station. Especially given actions that they have taken when they had stuff that was, for all intents and purposes, working. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Sci-Fi et al sue NASA
Top
