|
IRQ posted:69 isn't really that old these days. Under certain circumstances, I'm told it can be the best days of your life.
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 17:46 |
|
|
raditts posted:Under certain circumstances, I'm told it can be the best days of your life. Alas, it is winter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
raditts posted:Under certain circumstances, I'm told it can be the best days of your life.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
blue squares posted:No one's going to cancel a show because it makes fun of the network If anything making fun of something just makes people more aware of the thing they're making fun of. I guarantee you that your average 30 Rock viewer is a lot more familiar with GE than other similar companies just because of the jokes the show made about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Even after they sold NBC, the first thing I thought of when GE decided to move it's corporate headquarters to Boston was "30 Rock". That is some powerful advertising.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Lady Naga posted:Sounds like a show I need to pick up, then. If the first episode doesn't grab you, try the second. I think it shows off the premise and tone of the show a bit better. My favorite from the first season is the sixth episode "Gavel"
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
Rocksicles posted:Alan Rickman died, just announced...
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
There's a lot of early-baby-boomer celebrities approaching death age. It's going to be a pretty regular thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
DivisionPost posted:From what little I (half-heartedly) gathered, it's opt-in. It's also considered a somewhat laughable metric for measuring viewership, even moreso than Nielsen. So as far as I'm concerned, a lot of this is NBC being NBC (and for that matter, Comcast being Comcast). They're screaming "REMAIN CALM! ALL IS WELL!" as the Homecoming parade descends into anarchy around them. What outside factors are you talking about? I seriously doubt there is anyone with an opinion that matters to Netflix that does not have access to the viewership data.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Fooz posted:There's a lot of early-baby-boomer celebrities approaching death age. It's going to be a pretty regular thing. 69-year old celebrities dying from cancer though, that seems to be an unusual one that's happened three times in the last couple weeks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Alan Rickman, more like Alan RIP, man...
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Miranda Sings is getting her own Netflix show I predict it will end up in the same spot Jessica Jones did in the TVIV end of the year poll
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
less laughter posted:Miranda Sings is getting her own Netflix show I never saw the results of that poll, where'd the thread go
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Baronash posted:What outside factors are you talking about? I seriously doubt there is anyone with an opinion that matters to Netflix that does not have access to the viewership data. Stockholders, I'd imagine. How's it gonna look from their perspective if Netflix keeps spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a TV show that only ~1-2M people watch? Granted, the only thing likely to matter to them, like HBO, is the number of subscriptions. That's how Netflix makes its money, after all, just like ad sales (which are determined by ratings) is how traditional TV makes its money. But you also gotta figure: we've been taught from our experiences and heartbreaks with broadcast programming that low overnight ratings are death, and we should avoid dead shows walking. It doesn't quite get through that ratings mean different things to broadcast services and premium services; Broadcast needs those numbers to be high to get the ad money that pays for these shows, while Premium just uses it as one of many measurements that determine the success of the show and focuses instead on subscriptions. But regardless of where a show airs, we assume, particularly in this era of serialization, "If nobody's watching it, it won't continue on anyway, so why should I watch?" This is all based on anecdotal evidence, but I suspect this is part of the reason why USA renewed Mr. Robot before the first season even began (thus dodging any questions about the show's future at the network if the overnights came in weak -- which, IIRC, they did), and why most people haven't given The Leftovers a chance (kind of a bad example since critics and audiences seemed at odds over Season 1, but again, I think they were bad at the outset). I know I have trouble rolling the dice on Second Chance, and I'm a rabid Rand Ravich fanboy. So apply that to Netflix. You take the numbers out of the equation, all you're left with is critical and social consensus. Good consensus attracts more viewers, which translates to more subscribers. (Of course, there's The Ridiculous Six, where Netflix had to brag about its numbers because it sure as poo poo couldn't brag about anything else related to that catastrophe.) Add the numbers back in, you risk "Dead Show Walking" syndrome, where the expectation of cancellation keeps new audiences away. Again, it's all anecdotes and suppositions, and there are plenty of good reasons to make that data public. But I think it's worth considering that possible side of things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
zoux posted:I never saw the results of that poll, where'd the thread go Rarity posted:Yeah, I guess I can. I was already planning on it seeing as it'll be needed next year, I've just been enjoying being lazy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Alan Rickman's best TV role was the voice of the Renaissance Fair king on King of the Hill. I don't know if he had any other roles on TV shows, but they're probably not better than that.Josh Lyman posted:Trump Lady Naga posted:Sounds like a show I need to pick up, then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
DivisionPost posted:Stockholders, I'd imagine. How's it gonna look from their perspective if Netflix keeps spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a TV show that only ~1-2M people watch? Do you know for a fact that stockholders get viewership numbers? I doubt it, personally. At least as long as things are going well there's no reason for them to disclose that and no reason for the stockholders to ask for it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
What's controversial about this? JJ too high?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
zoux posted:What's controversial about this? Nobody said it was controversial, you're just stirring up drama now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
less laughter posted:Nobody said it was controversial, you're just stirring up drama now. No it's just heavily implied by your post.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
Don't be obtuse. It was a joke about the news that Miranda Sings is getting a Netflix show and that getting voted into the top 10.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
zoux posted:What's controversial about this? JJ too high? I really need to get around to finishing that show.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
Occ got really mad about JJ, it was great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
IRQ posted:Do you know for a fact that stockholders get viewership numbers? I doubt it, personally. At least as long as things are going well there's no reason for them to disclose that and no reason for the stockholders to ask for it. I doubt it too. I was referring to a hypothetical scenario where the numbers were made public. I theorized that in that case, there would be more outside pressure for Netflix to cancel low-rated but critically adored shows. Somebody asked where that pressure would come from, and I took my best guess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
Going through The Hunnit season 2 now. Why is everyone making such a big fuss over Finn, he's been a psychopathic piece of poo poo all season that murdered a bunch of people. It's getting kind of grating. My favorite character is Miller, solely because he came out of nowhere and everyone was like "Oh hey, it's Miller!" He's like this show's version of Roy from that one Simpsons episode. Whenever he pops in to deliver a line or two my wife and I roll our eyes and go "Oh, Miller!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
So now it's being reported that CBS is planning to yank all the CW content off Netflix when their contract is up in August and start their own CW streaming service. It would be priced at $2-$4 per month, not sure if this would be an addon to CBS's planned streaming services or what. If it's ad supported, I guess that's it for me watching CW shows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
If they're going to do this, the UI they design better be on loving point. This venture is already poised to be a tremendous inconvenience that snubs an ad-free platform with a long reach across multiple devices in favor of an ad-supported one with a significantly shorter reach. And they want you to pay an additional fee for it. If that poo poo isn't easy to navigate and bug free, it's going to blow up in their faces real bad, and the worst part is, nobody will win.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:04
|
|
|
Oh my god have fun gutting the CW's entire audience there
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
What the gently caress apparently Playing House was renewed for Season 3.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
DivisionPost posted:What the gently caress apparently Playing House was renewed for Season 3. God sometimes shows his love to us.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
12 Monkeys S2 is starting on April 18th.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
Too many god drat streaming services.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
GreenNight posted:Too many god drat streaming services. It's how it's gonna be, until a major one fails.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
You mean like Yahoo did?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
Eh everyone expects Yahoo to fail. But you're right, it could be just how it is from now on and we have to pay $3 bucks a month because somehow the Golf Channel scored a can't miss prestige drama.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
Netflix better up their game, all they're gonna have left is their own shows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
GreenNight posted:Netflix better up their game, all they're gonna have left is their own shows. Nah. What's going to happen is a bunch of this attempts to copy the success of netflix aren't going to have the same convenience and people are going to pirate the shows instead of adding a new subscription. Amazon, Netflix, and probably Hulu are in a pretty safe situation as the big three. Amazon's premium subscription add-ons is a smart option, and I could see more networks trying to get deals like that with amazon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:53
|
|
|
Does anyone know how well CBS All Access is doing? I know I would never touch it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
It would be pretty sweet if I had access to CBS All Access since I pay for CBS already via Dish.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 17:46 |
|
|
GreenNight posted:Netflix better up their game, all they're gonna have left is their own shows. No, the networks need to watch out because they are playing with fire. Netflix arguably has enough original programming to be worth the subscription to many people and the amount of that programming is only increasing. So, it is not likely people are going to drop the service because a few network shows disappear. However, the network stands to lose by limiting the reach of their shows. I already thought about watching season 1 and 2 of iZombie while recording the third season as I catch up, but I'm not going to tack on a CW streaming service to do so. So, I'll continue not watching the show then. Stuff like that will happen across the board. Their loss, peak TV and all that. There's already too much to watch, decisions on what to watch are going to largely be made on availability of content.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2016 01:01
|
|
