Merlin's Return?

[23skidoo]

There's an article in today's Washington Post that's rather on point. NBC is trying to rewrite the "rules" of television, basically. They're not looking for ratings wins. They're looking to fill the hours cheaply, fully expecting low advertiser dollars. Plugging a show like Merlin, which they're buying on the cheap, puts a quality, polished program in the schedule. They don't need great ratings for it. They don't even need good ratings for it. The show performed to expectations. Like the new Jay Leno show, Merlin is the model for NBC's future.

If we get more quality shows like Merlin on US TV as a result, this might well be a good thing (if BBCA hadn't taken over the broadcasts of Doctor Who, I bet it might have turned up on NBC eventually, too). It doesn't matter to me if they're cheap and only watched by 50,000 people, give me a dozen Merlins instead of more Jay Leno clones and "Who wants to marry an axe murderer" reality crap.

As a further aside, has anyone heard if there will be a North American DVD release of season 1?

Alex

 

[wamdue]

Anybody know when the UK "Merlin" returns? It's been almost a year now. I know the BBC are notorious for not wanting to advertise air dates but has anybody heard anything?

ok its now offical

DRAMA: Merlin
On: BBC 1
Date: Saturday 19th September 2009 (starting in 10 days)
Time: 18:50 to 19:35 (45 minutes long)

Fantasy-drama series based on Arthurian legend.
(2008, 3 Star)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Excerpt taken from DigiGuide - the world's best TV guide available from http://www.getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=132606

Copyright (c) GipsyMedia Limited.

given the promos its no real surprise, still odd it was not on the BBC Press website

 

[KB24]

What is navie? Do you mean naive?

 

[AviTrek]

so navie.

if only US shows were sold on the idea that, its better to be on a channel with more viewers, than to sell it to the highest bidder.

Shows are sold to the highest bidders. Networks can pay more based on how many people will watch the show. Excluding premium channels that have high subscription fees, the more viewers that a network has, the more it can and will spend on a show. If NBC could expect 10 million viewers it would outbid every cable channel. If it's only getting 1 million viewers then cable channels have a chance to outbid depending on how many of those viewers are expected to have the cable channel also.

Remember, Merlin isn't a new show trying for the largest audience possible anymore. It had a full season on NBC and knows what its audience is/will be.

again you are being navie, many US shows have been removed from large audience on freeview TV channels to air on the Sky One PayTV platform, 24, Nip/Tuck, Lost, Prison Break & House to name a few.

whilst channels like Living totally over paid for Supernatural (used to be on ITV) and probaly did the same for Medium that used to the be the BBC.

I was talking about airing in the US. I'm not as familiar with the British system so I won't speculate on your example too much. But if the ratings were lowish on freeview then shifting to a smaller channel is exactly analogous to what we're describing happening for Merlin.

There's an article in today's Washington Post that's rather on point. NBC is trying to rewrite the "rules" of television, basically. They're not looking for ratings wins. They're looking to fill the hours cheaply, fully expecting low advertiser dollars. Plugging a show like Merlin, which they're buying on the cheap, puts a quality, polished program in the schedule. They don't need great ratings for it. They don't even need good ratings for it. The show performed to expectations. Like the new Jay Leno show, Merlin is the model for NBC's future.

If we get more quality shows like Merlin on US TV as a result, this might well be a good thing (if BBCA hadn't taken over the broadcasts of Doctor Who, I bet it might have turned up on NBC eventually, too). It doesn't matter to me if they're cheap and only watched by 50,000 people, give me a dozen Merlins instead of more Jay Leno clones and "Who wants to marry an axe murderer" reality crap.

As a further aside, has anyone heard if there will be a North American DVD release of season 1?

Alex

If NBC didn't air Doctor Who during the writers strike they were never going to. They experimented with BSG and it flopped, they weren't about to take a show with an even smaller audience and try that on NBC.

 

[wamdue]

Shows are sold to the highest bidders. Networks can pay more based on how many people will watch the show. Excluding premium channels that have high subscription fees, the more viewers that a network has, the more it can and will spend on a show. If NBC could expect 10 million viewers it would outbid every cable channel. If it's only getting 1 million viewers then cable channels have a chance to outbid depending on how many of those viewers are expected to have the cable channel also.

Remember, Merlin isn't a new show trying for the largest audience possible anymore. It had a full season on NBC and knows what its audience is/will be.

again you are being navie, many US shows have been removed from large audience on freeview TV channels to air on the Sky One PayTV platform, 24, Nip/Tuck, Lost, Prison Break & House to name a few.

whilst channels like Living totally over paid for Supernatural (used to be on ITV) and probaly did the same for Medium that used to the be the BBC.

I was talking about airing in the US. I'm not as familiar with the British system so I won't speculate on your example too much. But if the ratings were lowish on freeview then shifting to a smaller channel is exactly analogous to what we're describing happening for Merlin.

no Supernatural was well rated on ITV 2, that is why it moved to Living, and why Lost moved to sky.

PayTV is not the hero you think it is, it does not pick up low rated shows that the main networks no longer want, its picks up hit shows, in order to force people to sign up for PayTV.

 

[AviTrek]

again you are being navie, many US shows have been removed from large audience on freeview TV channels to air on the Sky One PayTV platform, 24, Nip/Tuck, Lost, Prison Break & House to name a few.

whilst channels like Living totally over paid for Supernatural (used to be on ITV) and probaly did the same for Medium that used to the be the BBC.

I was talking about airing in the US. I'm not as familiar with the British system so I won't speculate on your example too much. But if the ratings were lowish on freeview then shifting to a smaller channel is exactly analogous to what we're describing happening for Merlin.

no Supernatural was well rated on ITV 2, that is why it moved to Living, and why Lost moved to sky.

PayTV is not the hero you think it is, it does not pick up low rated shows that the main networks no longer want, its picks up hit shows, in order to force people to sign up for PayTV.

In the UK maybe. In the US first shows rarely switch networks, and you never see shows go to a more exclusive network to try and bring viewers over. When it happens it's a show that can't make it on broadcast shifting to a smaller station that can accept lower ratings.

 

[wamdue]

I was talking about airing in the US. I'm not as familiar with the British system so I won't speculate on your example too much. But if the ratings were lowish on freeview then shifting to a smaller channel is exactly analogous to what we're describing happening for Merlin.

no Supernatural was well rated on ITV 2, that is why it moved to Living, and why Lost moved to sky.

PayTV is not the hero you think it is, it does not pick up low rated shows that the main networks no longer want, its picks up hit shows, in order to force people to sign up for PayTV.

In the UK maybe. In the US first shows rarely switch networks, and you never see shows go to a more exclusive network to try and bring viewers over. When it happens it's a show that can't make it on broadcast shifting to a smaller station that can accept lower ratings.

but how many imports have been on the main networks? very very few.

if your networks had more imports on there channels, more of them would end up going to PayTV.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

I was talking about airing in the US. I'm not as familiar with the British system so I won't speculate on your example too much. But if the ratings were lowish on freeview then shifting to a smaller channel is exactly analogous to what we're describing happening for Merlin.

no Supernatural was well rated on ITV 2, that is why it moved to Living, and why Lost moved to sky.

PayTV is not the hero you think it is, it does not pick up low rated shows that the main networks no longer want, its picks up hit shows, in order to force people to sign up for PayTV.

In the UK maybe. In the US first shows rarely switch networks, and you never see shows go to a more exclusive network to try and bring viewers over. When it happens it's a show that can't make it on broadcast shifting to a smaller station that can accept lower ratings.

Probably because networks don't generally show imported shows in the way UK networks do. So if, in general, you're airing a UK show you're doing it on a cable channel (or PBS) or one of the more niche channels to start with.

If they imported them like here, and say for instance The CW scored a hit with Skins, bringing in 5 or 6 million then the rights came up for renewal HBO might try to swipe the rights, because it wouldn't be a big enough hit for the bigger networks, but it would be a huge hit for the smaller ones even with a quarter of the viewers.

That's kinda how it happens here, but I think most of our shows would be out straight away because of standards and practices, as well as how long they are and the cuts that would need to be made.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

but how many imports have been on the main networks? very very few.

On broadcast and outside PBS? Merlin is the first since the 60s or early 70s.

 

[wamdue]

has there not been some Canadian shows air on the US networks recently?

 

[AviTrek]

Very few cable channels have the incentive to get programming to force people to upgrade. Premium channels(HBO, Showtime, etc..) do since they get added revenue for each subscriber, but on basic cable it doesn't work that way. Customers pay the cable company for service and the cable companies pay the channels to carry them. If Merlin switched to cable very few people would get cable for it, and even those that did the extra revenue BBCA got per subscriber would be so low that it wouldn't make a difference. 99% of the extra money people paid would go to the cable company and all the other channels.

 

[wamdue]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/2009/wk38/sat.shtml#sat_merlin

why this wasnt online last Friday I have no clue

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Very few cable channels have the incentive to get programming to force people to upgrade. Premium channels(HBO, Showtime, etc..) do since they get added revenue for each subscriber, but on basic cable it doesn't work that way. Customers pay the cable company for service and the cable companies pay the channels to carry them. If Merlin switched to cable very few people would get cable for it, and even those that did the extra revenue BBCA got per subscriber would be so low that it wouldn't make a difference. 99% of the extra money people paid would go to the cable company and all the other channels.

That's more or less how it works over here too, but I guess they kinda hope a momentum builds up so it's like people will subscribe (and attract more viewers of course since they still advertise) because they have multiple shows they want to watch, not 1 killer show. BBC America for example has Primeval, Doctor Who, Torchwood, etc. They might not subscribe for Merlin, but Merlin plus those others? Perhaps. Of course if you look at it as they get pennies per subscriber if you end up with millions of subscribers it still makes it worth your while to attract new subscribers because it will bring some revenue.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Very few cable channels have the incentive to get programming to force people to upgrade. Premium channels(HBO, Showtime, etc..) do since they get added revenue for each subscriber, but on basic cable it doesn't work that way. Customers pay the cable company for service and the cable companies pay the channels to carry them. If Merlin switched to cable very few people would get cable for it, and even those that did the extra revenue BBCA got per subscriber would be so low that it wouldn't make a difference. 99% of the extra money people paid would go to the cable company and all the other channels.

I have friends who subscribe to Showtime only when The Tudors or Weeds is on, or who subscribe to HBO only when The Sopranos was on. Those make sense to me.

I cannot imagine someone adding a whole new cable tier to get BBC America just so they can see Merlin.

 

[wamdue]

maybe not just for Merlin, but if the US networks aired more UK imports, BBC Am might start getting aggressive in getting the rights to them, at some point making the channels seem worth subscribing to

of course there is also the idea that PayTV taking imports from freeTV is a floored model, as chances are alot of people will just download off the web, but it does not stop Sky from taking the shows anyways.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

maybe not just for Merlin, but if the US networks aired more UK imports, BBC Am might start getting aggressive in getting the rights to them, at some point making the channels seem worth subscribing to

of course there is also the idea that PayTV taking imports from freeTV is a floored model, as chances are alot of people will just download off the web, but it does not stop Sky from taking the shows anyways.

Which is why Sky push to show them as soon as possible after US airing.
It's a shame shows are produced the way they are in the US, because that means we get all those stupid delays in new shows like they do now.

 

[wamdue]

maybe not just for Merlin, but if the US networks aired more UK imports, BBC Am might start getting aggressive in getting the rights to them, at some point making the channels seem worth subscribing to

of course there is also the idea that PayTV taking imports from freeTV is a floored model, as chances are alot of people will just download off the web, but it does not stop Sky from taking the shows anyways.

Which is why Sky push to show them as soon as possible after US airing.
It's a shame shows are produced the way they are in the US, because that means we get all those stupid delays in new shows like they do now.

and that is fine if you are already a Sky costumer (or you want to be one), but if you do not wish to encourage Sky in there actions by becoming a costumer chances are you are going to get that show you just lost from the web.

make no mistake PayTV is part of the problem with illegal downloads, im betting illegal downloads for House have gone up since it moved to Sky.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

maybe not just for Merlin, but if the US networks aired more UK imports, BBC Am might start getting aggressive in getting the rights to them, at some point making the channels seem worth subscribing to

of course there is also the idea that PayTV taking imports from freeTV is a floored model, as chances are alot of people will just download off the web, but it does not stop Sky from taking the shows anyways.

Which is why Sky push to show them as soon as possible after US airing.
It's a shame shows are produced the way they are in the US, because that means we get all those stupid delays in new shows like they do now.

and that is fine if you are already a Sky costumer (or you want to be one), but if you do not wish to encourage Sky in there actions by becoming a costumer chances are you are going to get that show you just lost from the web.

make no mistake PayTV is part of the problem with illegal downloads, im betting illegal downloads for House have gone up since it moved to Sky.

Big gaps, and the expense of Sky is what drives illegal downloads...

 

[Allyn Gibson]

maybe not just for Merlin, but if the US networks aired more UK imports, BBC Am might start getting aggressive in getting the rights to them, at some point making the channels seem worth subscribing to

First, Merlin has more chance of being seen on NBC than on BBC America. NBC is available in 99 percent of American homes. BBC America is somewhere around 60 percent.

Second, cable and satellite is not a la carte, though the companies would love that; they could charge more for each channel individually than they could when they bundle them into tiers. (That seems counter-intuitive, but it's not. Someone not watching a channel is subsidizing the people who do on their tier. If you had to pay for each channel individually, the cable companies would claim that they need to charge more because it costs more to serve each channel separately.)

Third, while there may be that sort of cultural shift in imported programming, we're at the beginning of the process. Imports simply haven't made broadcast network television here in years. Perhaps if imports take root, then we might see what you're talking about with series "migrating" to other channels in the 500-channel universe. But it's unlikely. An American network would be likely to tie up the rights for an imported series for several years, either outright or with options on first-refusal.

Basically, wamdue, this is a long way of saying, "I get what you're saying, but it doesn't work like that."

 

[wamdue]

maybe not just for Merlin, but if the US networks aired more UK imports, BBC Am might start getting aggressive in getting the rights to them, at some point making the channels seem worth subscribing to

First, Merlin has more chance of being seen on NBC than on BBC America. NBC is available in 99 percent of American homes. BBC America is somewhere around 60 percent.

Basically, wamdue, this is a long way of saying, "I get what you're saying, but it doesn't work like that."

im going to say the same to you.