Ten to axe The Simpsons!

Will you be sad to see the Simpsons go?

  • Yes

    Votes: 30 66.7%

  • No

    Votes: 6 13.3%

  • Don't care!

    Votes: 9 20.0%
  • Total voters
    45
aussiemjfreak said:
But Norm, it only talks about the 6pm time slot, not the 7.30pm Wednesday night ones! Thats what I was getting at! Plus, youd think if they are paying $25k for a rerun theyd be paying more for the newies! :lol:
Click to expand...

Just because they didn't mention the "other time slots" doesn't automatically mean that it doesn't apply to them either. All they did was mention what they would do with the 6 o'clock ones.
 
Here's the same story with a little more detail from tvtonight.com.au ...and guaranteed it will only be the 6pm Simpsons episode affected!! I don't know where the $25,000 per episode price comes from...it'd be more likely $25,000 per week given that they are repeats of repeats. (But I'm happy to stand corrected if it is $25k per ep!!)

90 minute News coming to TEN
By David Knox on April 27, 2009
Filed Under News

It’s been rumoured for months, but today the Daily Telegraph confirms Network TEN will extend its 5pm News bulletin to a 90 minute edition, ending at 6:30pm.

The high-risk strategy is being plotted in Sydney by TEN’s national news supremo Cathy Schnitzerling. Secret pilot shows have been filmed in most state capitals, it claims.

It is understood the show will borrow from the Sky News format with a chatty presentation heavy on sport and with regular headline updates. Key reporters will offer provocative commentaries on news and current affairs.

By dropping a $25,000 for each episode of The Simpsons, TEN could save $6million a year.

Last week TEN publicity was at pains to point out it was winning the 5:30pm slot so upstaged by the battle of the game shows on Seven and Nine.

Changes in television news continue elsewhere as Nine readies a new one-hour mix of news and current affairs at 4:30pm and a new set for its 6pm Sydney News.

Even TEN’s “mystery 7pm show” for the second half of the year has a news-angle, though likely to be a lot more funky with an emphasis on entertainment.

Source: Daily Telegraph
Click to expand...
 
Allstar cards inc said:
Here's the same story with a little more detail from tvtonight.com.au ...and guaranteed it will only be the 6pm Simpsons episode affected!! I don't know where the $25,000 per episode price comes from...it'd be more likely $25,000 per week given that they are repeats of repeats. (But I'm happy to stand corrected if it is $25k per ep!!)
Click to expand...

Now I won't lose as much sleep as before! lol :thumbsup:
 
Allstar cards inc said:
Here's the same story with a little more detail from tvtonight.com.au ...and guaranteed it will only be the 6pm Simpsons episode affected!! I don't know where the $25,000 per episode price comes from...it'd be more likely $25,000 per week given that they are repeats of repeats. (But I'm happy to stand corrected if it is $25k per ep!!)
Click to expand...

Given 52 X $25,000 = $1.3 million a year, it's definately per episode and not per week. Pretty steep amount really, probably a smart move by ten. They get smashed in that time slot anyway, why not save some costs. Usually the only ads they have are all about 'coming up on Neighbours' or 'tonight on The Biggest Loser', so can't see them lossing any ad revenue from die hard companies who only advertise during the Simpsons hehe.
 
Clegs11 said:
Given 52 X $25,000 = $1.3 million a year, it's definately per episode and not per week. Pretty steep amount really, probably a smart move by ten. They get smashed in that time slot anyway, why not save some costs. Usually the only ads they have are all about 'coming up on Neighbours' or 'tonight on The Biggest Loser', so can't see them lossing any ad revenue from die hard companies who only advertise during the Simpsons hehe.
Click to expand...

Do you think that putting the news on for an extra half an hour would save costs??

If anything it will cost more...but this extra cost would be outweighed by the chance to gain some more ratings points (and therefore extra revenue)

Whether it's 1.3mill or 6mill (you're assuming that the article is correct if you think it's 6 mill) the cost is not that steep when you divide it between all the capital city markets and factor in the amount that the regional affiliates chip in.
 
Allstar cards inc said:
Do you think that putting the news on for an extra half an hour would save costs??

If anything it will cost more...but this extra cost would be outweighed by the chance to gain some more ratings points (and therefore extra revenue)

Whether it's 1.3mill or 6mill (you're assuming that the article is correct if you think it's 6 mill) the cost is not that steep when you divide it between all the capital city markets and factor in the amount that the regional affiliates chip in.
Click to expand...

Yeah I considered this too, but I think the news people are always on stand by. You notice they do their regular bulletin updates etc during ads, so in terms of production crew and news hosts, and can't forsee them having to pay them any extra. They stick around regardless, so they're getting paid to sit around while the Simpsons is on. Now they have to just get used to a bit of extra camera time. Also, the extra 30 minutes might just be a dodgy way to drag out the 1 hour bulletin and chuck in more ads for a bit of extra revenue.
 
Clegs11 said:
Yeah I considered this too, but I think the news people are always on stand by. You notice they do their regular bulletin updates etc during ads, so in terms of production crew and news hosts, and can't forsee them having to pay them any extra. They stick around regardless, so they're getting paid to sit around while the Simpsons is on. Now they have to just get used to a bit of extra camera time. Also, the extra 30 minutes might just be a dodgy way to drag out the 1 hour bulletin and chuck in more ads for a bit of extra revenue.
Click to expand...

What makes you say this?? ( The bit in bold above) I can tell you from my experience there's very little "sticking or sitting around"....the majority of updates are done as pre-records unless there is a breaking story.

You'd expect that Ten would have to employ extra journos and production staff or otherwise they'd be relying on stories from their international sources like CNN, BBC, Sky etc.

And they can't "chuck in more ads" either, as there is legislation in place that dictates the amount of ads that can be played by the networks per hour...normally 12-14 minutes per hour. Networks can lose their licence for exceeding these limits. They would be hoping for an increase in ratings so that they can charge more per spot.
 
aside from homer ive never been a huge fan of the simpsons... i personally dont mind that its coming off air cause its on so bloody much which makes it incredibly annoying but i agree that replacing it with an extra half hour of news would be a dumb idea...

not sure what else would be in that timeslot
 
LOL What would you know Marcus? After all you only work in the TV industry.

I trust internet board information over that any day LOL
 
chadjaja said:
LOL What would you know Marcus? After all you only work in the TV industry.

I trust internet board information over that any day LOL
Click to expand...

Hey I was trying to keep it on the low-down....didn't want to come across as too much of a know-all!!!!! :eek::worthy::rolleyes:

There is a HUGE difference between some people's perception and reality as to what goes on behind the scenes in the TV industry....there's still some mystique there....but I can tell you it's a lot less glamorous than you think (except for me of course!!);)
 
Allstar cards inc said:
What makes you say this?? ( The bit in bold above) I can tell you from my experience there's very little "sticking or sitting around"....the majority of updates are done as pre-records unless there is a breaking story.
Click to expand...

Being a TV industry insider, maybe you can explain where all the production crew magically appears from when there's a breaking news story. As I would assume, they have people on stand by. I don't exactly get what you're trying to argue? The article says: "Ten says dropping The Simpsons would save it $6 million a year". Considering it costs them $25,000 an episode, and theres roughly 260 weekdays a year, theres $6.5 million, so effectively they're saying the news venture is costing them $500,000.

Being a TV industry expert, maybe you can tell us how they intend to produce a half hour news show for less than $2000 a show if they aren't maximising costs already being spent? Obviously they're factoring in expected higher TV ratings based on the same amount of ad time (as you so stated they're statute bound), but if this was there plan, then why wait this many years to try it? Seems more like a cost saving measure to me then a legitimate attempt to grab ratings.
 
So are they only getting rid of the re-runs everyday or are they going to axe the Simpsons completely (including the all new episodes on Friday)? If it's just the re-runs then I don't care about it as much because I've probably seen every episode at least 3 times.
 
Clegs11 said:
Being a TV industry insider, maybe you can explain where all the production crew magically appears from when there's a breaking news story. As I would assume, they have people on stand by. I don't exactly get what you're trying to argue? The article says: "Ten says dropping The Simpsons would save it $6 million a year". Considering it costs them $25,000 an episode, and theres roughly 260 weekdays a year, theres $6.5 million, so effectively they're saying the news venture is costing them $500,000.

Being a TV industry expert, maybe you can tell us how they intend to produce a half hour news show for less than $2000 a show if they aren't maximising costs already being spent? Obviously they're factoring in expected higher TV ratings based on the same amount of ad time (as you so stated they're statute bound), but if this was there plan, then why wait this many years to try it? Seems more like a cost saving measure to me then a legitimate attempt to grab ratings.
Click to expand...


The crew (normally just a camera-person) are "on-call" and magically appear because they monitor scanners or get tip-off calls from friends, the public or members of emergency services. Sometimes networks employ "stringers' to do this type of work....they get paid by the job and work the night shift.
 
Thats how Seinfeld has made his millions through syndication I think Seinfeld made something like $200 million through worldwide syndication. from wikki:

He earned $100 million from syndication deals and stand-up appearances in 2005 and $60 million in 2006
 
The demise of commercial television continues, to my great pleasure. Though it will be a little dissapointing to not be able to switch on Homer & co each week night.

Serioulsy though, the commercial networks are loosing the plot right now, and ABC & SBS are picking up the pieces.
7, 9 & 10 all seem to be unable to identify any kind of demographic to aim for, and have lost themselves in a quagmire of Reality [sic] programs and police/crime scene dramas.
There is a distinct inabilty amongst them to invest in local productions beyond cheap game shows and second rate dramas.
I'd hazard a guess that ABC2 would be starting to eat into their ratings a bit too, particularly with all the children's programming.
But they have not done themselves any favours lately, over the last decade inconsistant timeslots, cancelling of shows halfway through a series and airing episodes out of order have become the norm, right at the start of the digital dawn where we no longer have to pander to the whims of Programming Directors.
Nearly everything broadcast is available to download almost immediately, albeit sometimes illegally, and the DVDs normally released within a year or so. Why would we bother waiting up to 11pm for a show that they decide to cancel anyway, when we can now watch it in our own time, without waiting a week between each episode.
If they want to make it through this era they are going to have to learn to be reliable and consistant, as well as be a little more adventurous.

Adding another half hour of news is not adventurous.
 
I heard a TV newsreader talking on radio the about how they pre record the news updates and play these back at scheduled times during the evening. He said its weird watching his own updates go "Live to air" as he is sitting at home! LOL

As for not being Glamorous.....I was at Foxtel the other day and the Business Reporter didnt even have a camera man......there was a camera set up and recording at all times!!

Definitely not as much magic in TV as people believe!

Cheers
Matt
 
Hi

i agree with the other guy in tv industry too. The news wont cost them much extra for 30 mins they just repeat the same news story, like sky news stories repeated every 15 mins.

They only pay the camera man a extra fee for being on call 24/7 the get an extra fee for being on call then if they called out to a job then they get there wage plus a bonus amount.

So most of the times there wont be any extra news service it will be the same crap they had in 60 mins but extended in that extra half hour will be more adverts and product placements like channel 7 and channel 9 do on the morning shows that they made longer. They just have more crap wont have any breaking news stories if they do just means that you will see that story a extra couple of times cause they have extra half hour to fill in for the news

I work in the TV industry and i can tell you most of the reporters the reason there in that job 90% of them cause there not smart enough to do another job. The amount of times i have been asked by a reporter on a story that i only be told about the story five mins ago with little amount of details and there asking the camera man and the soundy for help on questions about the story.

There would be about say two or three reporters out of about fourteen i work with actually have any brains and could think of question for themselves. Most of them lucky to have one or stories a day too do and they still struggle to actually do anything. so when you see the next blonde bimbo reporting from some location dont expect some great news story, most of them are lucky if they can hold there notepad and microphone in one hand if they could do more than one thing at a time it would amaze me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom