ABC/CBS/NBC..death?

[Temis the Vorta]

I would be fine with CBS dying. Aside from football, there is nothing worth watching, and any of the other networks could pick up their football broadcasts.

But you know that means the end of Paramount Television, and quite possibily Star Trek as well?

CBS is the safest of them all. It has a large, loyal, geriatric audience that doesn't download or TiVO shows. The last remnant of the ad-watching TV viewer. CBS shows may have poor demos but they make up for it in sheer volume and audience loyalty. They're not like fickle Heroes viewers who bail on a show just because they object to how this or that character is being developed.

But the CBS audience is definitely not right for Star Trek. CBS viewers want police procedurals and if you throw sci fi their way, it better be 5% sci fi and 95% procedural. CBS tried diversifying into cult territory with Jericho and Moonlight, got smacked down, and now they've learned their lesson. They are sticking to their boring knitting and we won't see anything adventurous from them for the foreseeable future.

NBC and Fox have the Star Trek audience. Trouble is, those are the networks being hit first by the death of the traditional ad-viewing-based TV broadcast model. Their audiences want sci fi but don't want to watch the ads. That just means NBC and Fox have to figure out how to extract money from their viewers other ways; because until they do that, Star Trek (or other shows that appeal to the same audience) won't survive on TV.

 

[TedShatner10]

If procedual dramas are CBS' mainstay, how come Shark got zapped? I get the impression it was due to behind the scenes politics and incompetence rather than bad ratings.

 

[RoJoHen]

I would be fine with CBS dying. Aside from football, there is nothing worth watching, and any of the other networks could pick up their football broadcasts.

But you know that means the end of Paramount Television, and quite possibily Star Trek as well?

CBS is the safest of them all. It has a large, loyal, geriatric audience that doesn't download or TiVO shows. The last remnant of the ad-watching TV viewer. CBS shows may have poor demos but they make up for it in sheer volume and audience loyalty. They're not like fickle Heroes viewers who bail on a show just because they object to how this or that character is being developed.

But the CBS audience is definitely not right for Star Trek. CBS viewers want police procedurals and if you throw sci fi their way, it better be 5% sci fi and 95% procedural. CBS tried diversifying into cult territory with Jericho and Moonlight, got smacked down, and now they've learned their lesson. They are sticking to their boring knitting and we won't see anything adventurous from them for the foreseeable future.

NBC and Fox have the Star Trek audience. Trouble is, those are the networks being hit first by the death of the traditional ad-viewing-based TV broadcast model. Their audiences want sci fi but don't want to watch the ads. That just means NBC and Fox have to figure out how to extract money from their viewers other ways; because until they do that, Star Trek (or other shows that appeal to the same audience) won't survive on TV.

So what you're saying is that CBS is the safest...for now.

Because soon all its viewers will be dead.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Yeah, CBS may be the most screwed of them all. NBC and Fox have a motive to solve the problem now because it's hitting them now. CBS will have the advantage of being able to wait to see how the competitors solve the problem and copy them, but by then NBC and Fox (and ABC following not too long behind) may have locked in an advantage. It will be interesting to see how it all shakes out.

 

[stj]

If it was all about prime time, then the demise of the networks might be imminent. But it's also about the news, the soaps, late night, etc. Those are not going to be replaced by cable all that quickly, especially given the price gouging by the cable companies. In our area, broadcast reception is so awful that cable has been standard since the Fifties, but I won't have a cable box because those scumbags are way too evil to deal with when they have a monitor in the house.

As for Nielsen dying, as I recall there is compettition (Arbitron?) Nielsen's position is partly a matter of the networks' convenience in accepting an umpire. But I's sure that Nielsen is using new technology to produce demographics of incredible detail. I suspect the free commercial news media, as usual in my opinion, are way behind the curve. Of late they've gotten fixated on "the" demo (18-49,) whereas I suspect that sheer numbers are still most important, followed by income, sex and then age---and I suspect "the" real demo to watch is 18-34!

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The 18-49 demo was imposed by advertisers due to their longstanding belief that people don't change brand preferences after the age of 49 or so, so what's the point of advertising to them? Too much trouble. Easier to lock in younger aged consumers and then you have them for life.

This is actually an outmoded notion. Generations of people older than Baby Boomers tend not to switch brands as much as younger cohorts, but that's more of a cultural thing than an age thing - brand loyalty used to be a more powerful force in society and it's been withering away from a long time. The people who are now moving into their 50s have never been brand loyal and aren't going to start just because they are getting old.

Try convincing advertisers of that. They are oddly conservative in their thinking, given that they are supposedly working in a creative industry.

However, the other rationale, that getting someone who is 49 to switch brands is less useful than someone who is 18, still is valid. The 18 year old has more years on the meter, so a dollar of advertising spent going after the 18 year old is more cost-effective than the dollar spent going after the 49 year old.

The other big factor is that people under 35 don't watch TV ads anymore anyway. That just makes them even more valuable, if someone can figure out how to get to them.

 

[Squiggy]

But you know that means the end of Paramount Television, and quite possibily Star Trek as well?

Star Trek has had a better run than any other show/movie series in existence.

I'll get over it.

With the possible exception of Law and Order, Dr. Who or James Bond you would be correct.

Star Trek has almost 700 hours of episodes and 11 movies spanning 42 years.

Law and Order has 700ish episodes, no movies, spanning 18 years and has been gasping for air for several seasons.

Dr Who...while having more episodes is isn't a widely known as Star Trek in the US nor are there any movies.

James Bond...22 movies. Not even close.

 

[stj]

The concept of brand loyalty is taking a hit, since one way of disguising inflation is to introduce a "new" product that isn't really different but has a higher price. Further, given commercial competition for shelf space, genuinely new products have an extra problem, but possibly greater rewards, for both manufacturer and retailer. In the game of publicizing the new (real or feigned,) age demographics are of doubtful importance.

Which brings me back to sheer numbers (overall rating,) incomes, sex and then age. My guess is still that what brand loyalty as yet exists is established before 49, hence the inference that 18-34 is a more important age demographic than 18-49. Note that 18-34 is not as widely publicized. My suggestion is that Nielsen et al. are reluctant to give away too much of the goods free.

 

[TedShatner10]

This out of touch thinking about middle aged or elderly people supposedly being irrevelant helped to kill Shark even though it still attracted high ratings in awkward, constantly shifting timeslots. And the 45 to 65 crowd nowadays are more financially secure than the 20 to 39 crowd anyway.

And then CBS doesn't take torrent downloading into account (when the BBC now has I-Player). CBS is blowing most of its advantages and making too many elementary mistakes with that dumbfuck, Moonves, at the helm.

 

[RobertScorpio]

I would be fine with CBS dying. Aside from football, there is nothing worth watching, and any of the other networks could pick up their football broadcasts.

Not true. NCIS, The Big Bang Theory, How I Met Your Mother and 2 And a Half Men are all worth watching.

The best show on CBS is THE BIG BANG THEORY...IMO

Rob Scorpio

 

[stj]

My guess is still that what brand loyalty as yet exists is established before 49, hence the inference that 18-34 is a more important age demographic than 18-49.

Since this was revived, I see I forgot to say why 18-34 seems more important for what brand loyalty is still forming---these are years most people establish a family.