• The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.

So, when do the ratings come in?

Sherool: I may be wrong (probably!
lol.gif
) but I've understood that it's WB who can sell the show, DVDs, videos etc., not SciFi, since WB would still own those rights, even if SciFi has paid for the movie.

------------------
"Isn't the universe an amazing place? I wouldn't live anywhere else." - G'Kar, B5: Rangers
Kribu's Lounge | kribu@ranger.b5lr.com
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kribu:
Sherool: I may be wrong but I've understood that it's WB who can sell the show, DVDs, videos etc., not SciFi, since WB would still own those rights, even if SciFi has paid for the movie.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are correct. The original production company usually retains foreign distribution rights. Warner Brothers has one of the largest international distribution companies in the business (Warner Brothers International Distribution). I used to have their URL and I saw a page where they were hawking Crusade episodes to non-U.S. countries.

For Farscape, it is Henson that distributes it internationally.

------------------
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>But surely they can make more money from selling rights to a series to foreign networks (that doesn't even compete with them), and/or selling Video and DVD copies of the series internationaly, than from airing the series itself...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, they can't, because they don't own the movie, Warner Bros. does. Foreign sales and home video revenue all goes to the studio that produced the film (or series), not to the network that airs it. (As a rule.)

From what I've read, this is changing, or at least the networks are trying to change it, seeking to own at least a percentage of new series and thereby share in future revenues. According to one rumor this is the reason that a series deal was not hammered out between Warner Bros. and Sci-Fi prior to the pilot was shot, and why no one had an option on the actors for a series.

In this version of events one of the reasons for airing the movie and seeing what the ratings/demos look like is to arrive at some kind of guesstimate of the size of the pie WB and Sci-Fi are supposedly haggling over.

This may or may not be true; Savant or Alyson can comment on how likely (or impossible) it is. I read this several months ago, attributed to two sources I could not verify at the time and have since forgotten. (One of them may have been the source for the other. That's one of the problems with internet rumors. They get posted all over the place - without attribution - and people take this as "confirmation" since more than one site is reporting the same "story")

I mention it here only as a possible explanation for the way SFC has handled the movie (thus far), and because the whole issue of who owns what has come up.

Regards,

Joe

------------------
Joseph DeMartino
Sigh Corps
Pat Tallman Division
joseph-demartino@att.net
 
So SciFi does all the work and WB get to make (most of) the money. Doesn't sound fair to me, but then the world rarely is...

At least it should be easy to convince WB to let them do the show if they descide to make it. To them it's a win-win situation.

------------------
 
It has been my understanding that for their contribution to producing the show, Sci-Fi Channel gets more-or-less exclusive rights for using it during a certain period of time, or a certain number of airing times.

Whether these rights include or exclude overseas distribution, I do not know. But after "the current moment" has passed, Warner will again be the holder of all distribution rights.

Therefore the decision of "go or not go" also depends on negotiations between Sci-Fi Channel and Warner, and their expectations in both short and long term.

------------------
"We are the universe, trying to figure itself out.
Unfortunately we as software lack any coherent documentation."
-- Delenn
 
Ok. So from all of the discussion about revenue and what-not we now KNOW that the ratings must be below 2.6 mil?

That is not good.


Phil
frown.gif


------------------
"And that, Mollari, is why it will not be your people, or mine, or the Gaim, or the Drazi or the Vorlons or the Shadows who in the end will stand astride the galaxy like giants. It will be the humans."
"I think you are the one who is mad, G'kar," Londo said. "I can choose just as well as the humans. I can choose to stay in this cell, with you, or I can choose to leave."
"Yes, but can you choose for there not to be a cell at all?"
"I don't understand," Londo said.
"Exactly," G'kar said. "Exactly."
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Emfeeli:
Ok. So from all of the discussion about revenue and what-not we now KNOW that the ratings must be below 2.6 mil?

That is not good.


Phil
frown.gif


<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hrmmm, Im not sure that is what it meant. Sci-Fi didnt appear as a network on any of those reports, let alone Rangers movie. I think we are just as much in the dark as we were before.

------------------
'I don't believe in the no-win scenario' - JTK
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Recoil:
Hrmmm, Im not sure that is what it meant. Sci-Fi didnt appear as a network on any of those reports, let alone Rangers movie. I think we are just as much in the dark as we were before.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

SciFi did appear on the reports. Their Primetime and "all day" average ratings were shown. But, no individual SciFi program appeared in the program rankings.

I have read the column on medialifemagazine.com many times. On some occasions, Farscape has appeared in the "Top 10 Programs" for Adults 25-54 when it has had high-rated episodes.

------------------
 
you know with all the promotion for the movie it definately appears Rangers didn't even close to meeting Dune in the ratings and that's what we needed to get a series and I don't see that happening especially after I rechecked the wires at sfc and rangers wasn;t mentioned at all I don't see why I know I wouldn't for one make a series unless I know there was some hope of ever seeing money made off of it.

------------------
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sherool:
So SciFi does all the work and WB get to make (most of) the money. Doesn't sound fair to me, but then the world rarely is...

At least it should be easy to convince WB to let them do the show if they descide to make it. To them it's a win-win situation.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can't speak for movies, but for series the production company (in this case WB) is the one that takes the financial risk.

Example: Farscape costs $1.4 Million per episode to make, but SciFi only pays Henson $700 thousand per episode (Source: Variety).
Henson has to make up the difference with foreign distribution and other sources like merchandising.

This is typical TV financing.

I can't quote the entire interview, but this week's "Electronic Media" has an interview with Bruce Rosenblum of the WB Television Group. In the context of a question about selling series to cable, he said, "it's important that each of the basic cable networks, along with their studio partner, find a business model that creates incentives for the studio to finance the deficit of the project during the show's early years as they build what is hopefully a successful franchise. What we are finding is that the basic cable networks are positioning themselves where they are attempting to acquire franchise properties to build their identities. There is a good amount of competition among the cable networks to obtain these properties and, in light of the economic challenges facing us, there is a small light at the end of the tunnel if we can deliver product that delivers sufficient ratings for these cable networks to justify the prices.

{Keep in mind he is talking about both original series like Witchblade and re-runs like West Wing. The question was "WB has scored a number of successes recently in cable, from the first-run such as "Witchblade" to off-net sales of "The West Wind" What kind of opportunities does the company see in the cable realm?"}

------------------
 
Rangers was up against an NFL playoff game. I hope that SFC will take this into consideration when they make a decision on a series. Also, didn't Crusade never score above a 1.9?

I want a Rangers series so much--I'm tired of hearing bad news!
frown.gif


Tammy

------------------

"We're in here! Can anyone hear us?"
"I hear you." [giggle, laugh]
"In here!"
"We are here." [giggle, laugh]
-- Londo and G'Kar in Babylon 5:"Convictions"

Tammy's Station
http://community.webtv.net/gkarfan/TammysStation
 
Here's another Avenue of elightenment.
Zap2it.com has a small Cable Rating section: http://tv.zap2it.com/news/ratings/
It displays the top 15 cable events of the week and went down to a rating of 2.1 for the week before last.
Unfortunately it is posted on Wednesday for the week ending 10 days before hand. So the ratings of 1/19/02 would not show up until next Wednesday.
So if Sci-Fi channel is coverd by the Survey, and there isn't a surge of Cable ratings that week, and assuming that B5LR made at least a 2.1 (epoch scored a 2.3, BTW)...
We may have an aswer on the Ratings by next wednesady.

That's alof of ifs and buts, I know.
We can only hope...
frown.gif


------------------
 
I think no matter how much we may want a series I don't think well get one because their just isn't enough interest for it it would seem by the from what I could tell less than high ratings for rangers.




------------------
 
Just one thing to remember about Farscape premier ratings, the series was commissioned before the premier ever aired. (It says so in one of the interviews on the DVD)

------------------
Faith Manages
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Wow. Didn't Into the Fire get a 4.1 once?
I wonder what happened to all those people. Think it was just the playoffs, or what?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Into the Fire" (in addition to being the climax of a three-year story) aired on broadcast television, not cable. PTEN and the local stations that carried the show reached more households than cable does, and not all cable households can get networks like Sci-Fi or TNT. So the ratings will typically be lower on cable.

Regards,

Joe

------------------
Joseph DeMartino
Sigh Corps
Pat Tallman Division
joseph-demartino@att.net
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Joseph DeMartino:
"Into the Fire" aired on broadcast television, not cable.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks, Joe! I had no idea. I was under the impression that an episode did so well that SciFi decided to do the telemovie.

So it was just the generally good ratings overall during the first run that made SciFi eager to do the movie?



------------------
"I don't know why we are here, but I'm pretty sure that it is not in order to enjoy ourselves." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
blackstar@welivefortheone.b5lr.com | BlackStar's Gallery
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>So it was just the generally good ratings overall during the first run that made SciFi eager to do the movie?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep. Sci-Fi was pleasantly surprised at how well B5 did on "their air" on what was already its seventh or eighth rerun cycle. (Especially given that TNT had just finished rerunning the entire series - 6 days a week and twice on two of the Saturdays in order to fit it all in - before they picked up the show.)

That's why the commissioned Rangers as a B5 project, and why Crusade wasn't really an issue in their talks with Warner Bros. and JMS. When they made the deal for Rangers they had either just acquired or were about to acquire the rights to the Crusade reruns, but were months away from actually airing the show and seeing what the ratings looked like.

(Which is why, despite a lot of whining posts, doing "Crusade instead" was never remotely an option.)

Regards,

Joe

------------------
Joseph DeMartino
Sigh Corps
Pat Tallman Division
joseph-demartino@att.net
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FlarnHead:
Here's another Avenue of elightenment.
Zap2it.com has a small Cable Rating section: http://tv.zap2it.com/news/ratings/
It displays the top 15 cable events of the week and went down to a rating of 2.1 for the week before last.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uhhh...I already posted that on Page 1 of this thread. What, don't you read all 100 posts in the thread before you add to it?
wink.gif



------------------
 
Is it possible that while none of the three separate showings of the movie got spectacular ratings, the ratings were OK if all three are considered?

It would seem to me that if the movie is aired three times over two days, then many people would have chosen to watch just one of the showings, and not necessarily the 9 PM Saturday one.

Or would the published ratings already take all three showings into account, sort of combining the three?

------------------
"Isn't the universe an amazing place? I wouldn't live anywhere else." - G'Kar, B5: Rangers
Kribu's Lounge | kribu@ranger.b5lr.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 564 (members: 0, guests: 564)

Share this page

Back
Top