Re: Summer reruns
Summer re-runs are an interesting phenomenon to be sure. Here are a few ideas: 1- Belief in the "superiority" of one's own programming. Summer re-runs cause viewers to watch the shows they don't normally watch (the second choice for a given programming night). If a station believes they truly have the best programming, but that some people did not "sample" it during the fall - then summer re-runs ARE an opportunity to steal market share. 2-A related point is that re-runs are a form of advertising of the program (to "hook" new viewers, and as such might be justified even if they did have a marginal cost, but ---> 3- The fact that the marginal cost of re-runs is zero (or very near) is also important. (As a side note, one should probably consider that advertising revenues might be higher for new programming; but the question of whether a new episode of is worth more than a re-run of is a separate one which has probably been looked at elsewhere. ) Can anyone help me here? 4- Intuitively, it might seem as if the networks have an excess capacity problem (not using their studios in the summer). Maybe the studios and background workers who would be more apt to work "year round" are used to make TV movies in the off season. 5- It is conceivable that some combination of actor's unions and the preferences of "stars" have kept this system in place (perhaps to preserve opportunities to make movies). Didn't some of the newer networks (FOX and UPN) experiment with new episodes year-round in their early years? -Original Message- From: Lehmann, Ray (CTG) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, July 10, 2000 2:07 PM Subject: Summer reruns >It strikes me the recent wild success of "reality-based" television programs >like Survivor, Big Brother, and 1900 House can largely be attributed to the >fact that these, along with sports and news programs, constitute just about >the only original content on the major networks during their summer hiatus. >Which causes me to wonder how it is that the tradition of "summer reruns" >has managed to last so long. Why have the networks apparently been averse to >breaking the tradition and producing more original content in the summer to >capture market share from their rivals? > >R.J. Lehmann >Retail Editor >Travel Weekly >(201) 902-1931 (v) >(201) 319-1947 (f) > > >
Re: Summer reruns
Also, a lot of folks don't like to work in the summer.Especially in CA. Best Regards, MG been averse > to > >breaking the tradition and producing more original content in the summer > to > >capture market share from their rivals? > > > >R.J. Lehmann > >Retail Editor > >Travel Weekly > >(201) 902-1931 (v) > >(201) 319-1947 (f) > > > > > > >
RE: Summer reruns
> > > 3- The fact that the marginal cost of re-runs is zero (or very > near) is also > important. (As a side note, one should probably consider that advertising > revenues might be higher for new programming; but the question of > whether a > new episode of is worth more than a > re-run of is a separate one which has > probably been looked at elsewhere. ) Can anyone help me here? > I used to purchase programming for a TV company in Turkey, and at least for foreign markets the re-runs of popular shows (popularity measured by the ratings in that territory, not in the US) are far above the new episode of a marginal program. It has been almost 10 years so I do not remember a lot of names and prices, but for example I remember purchasing "mad about you" for about $6,000 per episode (which did not have any appeal to Turkish audiences) rather than purchasing reruns of "picket fences" which did extremely well. In addition, for the Turkish market, all material is dubbed. Dubbing is an expensive service, even in Turkey where there are really thin markets for professional actors, it costs about 2,000-3,000 per 30 minute episode of an average sitcom; and reruns (which are not obviously dubbed again) of picket fences still did not make sense. > 4- Intuitively, it might seem as if the networks have an excess capacity > problem (not using their studios in the summer). Maybe the studios and > background workers who would be more apt to work "year round" are used to > make TV movies in the off season. I think networks do not produce a lot of sitcoms or entertainment programs. They generally only produce news programs or things like 60/60. Producing is also very expensive, even when the company does not have to pay for a big star. Look how CNN cheers when they could spend the whole day with live broadcast of one disaster or the other. Yesim
