Eureka canceled. Season 5 next year, beyond that, nothing.

[Angela V]

the space channel pays for Sanctuary so I don't know how much say that scifi will have.

But how much is Space in control? Wasn't it SyFy that wanted a longer 3rd season? I'm a bit confused with how much Sanctuary relies on SyFy to stay on air. If they aren't then that's great! And I do hope that's true because now that Bell Media owns the Space channel, they have money. It's why Space is now in HD (it's about time! Though only for Bell Satellite users at the moment like me).

[Thunderstorm]

Does anybody know whether Eureka actually run at a loss or whether it just didn't make enough? I get the impression it's the latter which if right, you have to question the mentality of a bean counter who say's the networks highest rated scifi show isn't profitable enough so cancel it, it's not like people are going to watch it's replacement.

SyFy is all about the return on investment, that's why they have those stupid creature movies. Last I heard they pay 1 million or less for them and get the same or better ratings so it's a great money maker for them.

the space channel pays for Sanctuary so I don't know how much say that scifi will have.

Space channel probably just pays to show the show in Canada.

SyFy pays to show Sanctuary in the US, so if what they are paying isn't enough for the ratings they can decline to show it on their network even if the show isn't cancelled in Canada. Although I would think that that loss of money would be enough to stop production.

And if you think SyFy is the only channel that does this, you should go and look at the problems with The Walking Dead over on AMC. Although any network that willing okays a budget of 4 million an ep for any show should not later complain that it's too expensive.

[DigiFluid]

Space doesn't pay for Sanctuary, it's Syfylis' show. Space just pays the license fee to broadcast it--the way every channel ever pays to broadcast shows that they don't make themselves.

[GATEGOD]

I am steaming! If it were up to me these "people" wouldn't be allowed to decide what tv show their own children should watch. This is beyond ridiculous. If you want to re brand go name yourself the RealityFail channel we don't need you muddying the name of sci-fi and stop pretending you care about science fiction shows.

/End Geek Rage

[Skydiver]

skiffy literally cares for nothing but profit margins. Yes, they do 'play nice' with the actors and crew of shows they air. who doesn't. it's being professional.

but it all comes down to money and profit margins

that's one thing fans dont' get. there is zero emotional attachment on skiffy's part to any show. yeah, some members of skiffy's staff may like actors or shows on a personal level, but decisions on the renewal or cancellation of a show comes down to simple money. Does it make enough? is it profitable enough to keep making? can they get a good return on their investment?

and if there's a no in there....there's dozens of shows waiting to be made. skiffy gets pitches every day for a new show, a cheaper show, one that might have that 40% profit margin instead of the 24% they get now. (made up those numbers by the way)

they sign shows, air them, discard them....and while they may play nice with current clients (we really love.....isn't this great....aren't they wonderful....etc) at the end of the day it all comes down to cold hard cash and profits.

there is zero emotional investment on skiffy's part.

[Ian-S]

and if there's a no in there....there's dozens of shows waiting to be made. skiffy gets pitches every day for a new show, a cheaper show, one that might have that 40% profit margin instead of the 24% they get now. (made up those numbers by the way)

made up numbers maybe, but that's not the way to run a business, if you have a product that brings you a 24% return, and someone comes along and offers you a replacement that is unproven and untested for cheaper, but to get this potential new money spinner, you must sacrifice your pre-existing product that gives you profit, you'd be mad to do it based on pure speculation. You either sacrifice something else that is loss making, or makes less than a 24% return, or pass up the deal because although the replacement has the potential to be more profitable, that's all it is, potential, and if it falls flat on it's face, you've made a double loss by killing your profitable product and made a loss on the replacement (plus you're already on an uphill struggle because you probably alienate the existing customers by cancelling their favourite product, so they're unlikely to buy (watch) the replacement out of spite).

It's no wonder these TV channels are going bust if they're making their programming decisions on speculation of what a new show might bring them while cancelling the existing bread and butter profitable shows.

[Browncoat1984]

skiffy literally cares for nothing but profit margins. Yes, they do 'play nice' with the actors and crew of shows they air. who doesn't. it's being professional.

but it all comes down to money and profit margins

that's one thing fans dont' get. there is zero emotional attachment on skiffy's part to any show. yeah, some members of skiffy's staff may like actors or shows on a personal level, but decisions on the renewal or cancellation of a show comes down to simple money. Does it make enough? is it profitable enough to keep making? can they get a good return on their investment?

and if there's a no in there....there's dozens of shows waiting to be made. skiffy gets pitches every day for a new show, a cheaper show, one that might have that 40% profit margin instead of the 24% they get now. (made up those numbers by the way)

they sign shows, air them, discard them....and while they may play nice with current clients (we really love.....isn't this great....aren't they wonderful....etc) at the end of the day it all comes down to cold hard cash and profits.

there is zero emotional investment on skiffy's part.

That's the problem, we DO get that SyFy has no emotional investment in the fans or shows they air and that's where they air failing. It isn't even so much the cancellation that is the problem but that so many of SyFy's shows are canceled with no proper conclusion. Sci-fi doesn't work like crime shows or medical shows. You can't just say "this is it" and let it end because with a few exception (like House and Castle) from one episode to another there's no carry-over. Your finale would be just a regular episode if people didn't know it was a finale. Sci-fi doesn't work like that because today most sci-fi shows have consistent character development and plot lines and to suddenly yank it away and say "sorry but the years you invested were useless because there will be no conclusion" yeah, that pisses off fans

And while you may be right, SyFy has pissed off fans one too many times. THREE times in the past year alone! You know, they say three strikes you're out and SyFy does not know that rule. I think the **** is going to hit the fan big time for SyFy as a result of this.

It also doesn't change the fact that, as I said, no network has EVER renewed a show only to turn around and cancel it. None. Not one. Until SyFy. A network that is supposed to care about science fiction and understand sci-fi fans.

Yes, its all about profit margins, but there are instances when letting it go despite it not being as profitable might be better. Take FOX and Fringe. They love the show as much as Sci-fi loves Eureka even though Fringe is #18 out of #20. They told fans that all they have to do is keep the audience numbers steady for renewal.

I know I keep on bringing Fringe up, but FOX could not have handled Fringe better than they have and shown the level of respect that Fringe's intelligent audience deserves. A far cry from the FOX of two or three years ago who was mainly known for cancelling sci-fi shows prematurely. Now SyFy has canceled more shows than FOX has. SyFy is now FOX 2.0 and you might also say UPN 2.0 (lack of proper advertisement/support).

I guess what I'm saying now is, don't watch SyFy but watch Fringe

[Skydiver]

I don't disagree with you. It's frustrating to watch a show and have it canned on you. Or to have skiffy 'save' a show then alter it to some odd bare resemblance of itself (they change a show to what they think their formula of a good show is...thing is what they think is good and a hit many general viewer don't share that same opinoin and shows' ratings fall off)

I totally understand how frustrating it is to have a show be saved then canned, or to have it just end iwth no resolution.....but skiffy will never change. If anything, as the economy gets worse and worse they'll do it more and more.

I don't let myself get emotionally attached to any show anymore. Because network after network will just frak you over and tis' not worth getting upset over.

I EXPECT skiffy to alter 'good' shows to their formula...and they simply seem unable to accept that whomever there is deciding 'good' doesn't share the taste of your random average viewer. i EXPECT skiffy to cater to fans and string them along....then toss them away like an empty water bottle when they think they no longer need them.

I'm nothing to skiffy. literally nothing. they don't give a damn if they make fans mad...because fans don't pay the bills, general anonymous viewers do. and those folks never get strung along and chatted to and talked to then lose their show.

[Snowman37]

Five years is a good run, no? Isn't Syfy extending the episode order from 14 to 15 episodes? This would suggest that the season had already finished production, hence Syfy authorized production on an extra episode, a series finale. I ask again, five years a good run, no? How often do we really see a good science-fiction show run longer? I can only think of a few. Star Trek (TNG, DS9, VOY), Stargate SG-1, The X Files, and... that's all I got.

[Skydiver]

13 to 14

i'ts my understanding that it was to be 1 christmas show plus 12 episodes, now it's 1 christmas episode plus 13 more

[Snowman37]

True, but point is... Syfy is giving the producers and writers an extra episode to end the series. I've never heard of a network doing that. Usually, when a show is cancelled, it's after the season finale or during production where the writers have time to write a last-minute series finale.

[Killdeer]

Maybe the network figures they owe the show that much at least. After all, it wasn't just a straight cancellation - they renewed the show for a six episode season, and then changed their minds.

Syfy's treatment of Eureka has been weird, though, really ever since the writers' strike. Last year they filmed all twenty episodes of S4, not knowing when the second half was going to air. But comments from the writers and cast indicated that they were very hopeful that it would air in early 2011, and S5 (which they're just getting ready to wrap up filming on now) would air this summer, similar I suppose to how Stargate used to be scheduled. Instead, Syfy held 4.5 until this summer and S5 until next. *shrugs* I don't understand it, but I am thankful at least that they're being nice enough to give them the extra episode to wrap it up.

[Snowman37]

Maybe the network figures they owe the show that much at least. After all, it wasn't just a straight cancellation - they renewed the show for a six episode season, and then changed their minds.

A six-episode season? Skydiver just said the show is returning for a fifth season consisting of 13 episodes, extended to 14 so a series finale can be produced. What's this about a cancelled six-episode season?

[Killdeer]

They got the Season Five renewal last year. They are currently wrapping up filming on Season Five which does consist of 14 episodes - a Christmas episode which will air in December, 12 regular episodes which will air next summer, and the additional final episode that they were given in order to wrap up the series.

They got a Season SIX commitment of six episodes last week, which would have presumably aired in 2013, but then this week the network changed its mind and backed out of the Season Six renewal.

[Snowman37]

Ah, thanks for the clarification. Well, I don't blame them for backing out of Season 6 when Season 5 hasn't even aired.

[Thunderstorm]

True, but point is... Syfy is giving the producers and writers an extra episode to end the series. I've never heard of a network doing that. Usually, when a show is cancelled, it's after the season finale or during production where the writers have time to write a last-minute series finale.

Last I heard, they were still in production filming the last ep of the 5th season. So if they wrote it quick they could film it while everyone is still around.

[maxbo]

Maybe the network figures they owe the show that much at least. After all, it wasn't just a straight cancellation - they renewed the show for a six episode season, and then changed their minds.

Syfy's treatment of Eureka has been weird, though, really ever since the writers' strike. Last year they filmed all twenty episodes of S4, not knowing when the second half was going to air. But comments from the writers and cast indicated that they were very hopeful that it would air in early 2011, and S5 (which they're just getting ready to wrap up filming on now) would air this summer, similar I suppose to how Stargate used to be scheduled. Instead, Syfy held 4.5 until this summer and S5 until next. *shrugs* I don't understand it, but I am thankful at least that they're being nice enough to give them the extra episode to wrap it up.

Interesting. So, this scheduling weirdness is not a recent issue. I'm also pleased that Eureka will have an extra episode to wrap up, but I'm still annoyed by the sloppy way this was handled.

From what you mentioned, it sounds like there were concerns about whether Eureka would continue beyond Season 4 - even with good ratings, so I wish they had declared that Season 5 would be the last season immediately instead of handling it this way. That way, the writers would have had the entire season to prep for the end instead of this bizarre back and forth where, within a week, they gave the show a 6th season to wrap up and then took it away only to then announce an extra Season 5 episode to wrap up.

If the ratings for the current season were bad, I could understand why they changed their mind about a 6th season, but that's not the case here, so I wonder what happened. I know one of Eureka's execs/writers mentioned that although Syfy loves the show, it's too expensive to keep, but they knew that when they approved the 6 episodes for Season 6 and they likely knew that while they began shooting Season 5, so what happened last week to make them decide that this was it?

[Skydiver]

No one knows what happened nor will they ever likely.

It's confusing because it was reported that they got renewed for s5 and 6 episodes for s6, but s5 had to have already been approved months ago since they were in the midst of taping it. they were granted 6 episodes for s6, but then that was cancelled and they were told 'nope, this is it'....well they were taping the s5 finale at the time. There was some stuff they could change, but there's only so much time. So they were given another episode.

This isn't totally unprecedented. How about SG1 and Threads being a 90 minute episode? the Pretender, I think, was cancelled to make room for Saturday Night FOotball, and they were given 3-4 TV movies instead of a new season.

It happens sometimes, and it's often more of a buy out than act of good will on the network's part. Especially if the network is breaking any contracts when they cancel a show.

It could be a situation close to what happened to Corin Nemec. Originally, he was hired for seasons 6 and 7, but then MGM changed their mind and he was 'released from his contract'....the buy out, being in two episodes of s7 plus writing an episode.

the 'extra' eureka episode may be a kind of severance pay, it's also possible that the Eureka producers were close enough to their budget that they had enough money left over to say 'look, give us a bit more and we can squeeze out an extra episode for not a lot more money'

[Killdeer]

They got the Season Five renewal in August 2010 - here's the press release.

LINK

[Killdeer]

I was going back and looking at older comments about scheduling in the ratings & scheduling thread. It looked like initially when S4.0 was airing that they believed that S4.5 would air in early 2011, maybe even January. But then it didn't, and later, when Colin Ferguson was asked about what was going on with the show and the short half seasons, he said this....

We're all disappointed," Colin responded when we shared your concerns. "We're disappointed too. We'd love to be on a show that aired year-round, or 22 episodes. So the fans' feelings are echoed [but we] don't have same resources as a major network."

So it appears that some time after the S5 renewal, the network decided they didn't have the resources to air Eureka more than once a year after all, so to save costs they stretched out their current episodes, which consisted of the S4.5 episodes filmed in 2010 and the S5 episodes filmed this summer.