PDA

View Full Version : Eureka canceled. Season 5 next year, beyond that, nothing.



Browncoat1984
August 8th, 2011, 10:54 PM
Just saw this on Airlock Alpha. Here's the link. http://www.airlockalpha.com/node/8665/syfy-cancels-eureka-this-time-for-real.html. I gotta say...I'm flabergasted. What network cancels their MOST TALKED ABOUT shows and doesn't give a reason? I can understand Caprica. I can even to an extent understand Stargate Universe (but not allowing a proper ending to one of its longest-running franchises I can't understand). I can't understand this. The ratings were nowhere near what SGU or Caprica was getting and...I don't know. This confirms that SyFy just does not know what it is doing...

watcher652
August 8th, 2011, 11:30 PM
I found out about it from tweets from Wil Wheaton and Felicia Day.

Felicia tweeted: (http://twitter.com/#!/feliciaday/status/100784607460474880)

Um...wow. So I guess @SyFy changed their minds and is UNpicking up Eureka..uh? http://t.co/2QAN8pO huh. Now it's awkward :(

and this: (http://twitter.com/#!/feliciaday/status/100785548670672896)

At any rate, it's been very fun to be on the show! Hope they can end the story with closure for the fans before the series ends. :) #Eureka

Felicia's link goes to an article at Entertainment Weekly.
http://insidetv.ew.com/2011/08/08/eureka-cancelled/

Wil tweeted: (http://twitter.com/#!/wilw/status/100785133719789568)

It's been one of the greatest joys of my life to work on #Eureka. I've made new friends for life, and I'm so proud of the stories we've told

and this: (http://twitter.com/#!/wilw/status/100785765902065664)

Thank you, @bergopolis, for bringing me in, @jaimepaglia for bringing me back, and the #Eureka cast and crew for making me feel like family.

Thunderstorm
August 9th, 2011, 12:24 AM
Deadline has SyFy's official statement

http://www.deadline.com/2011/08/its-over-eureka-canceled-with-no-final-6-episode-order/#more-155222

the Fifth Race
August 9th, 2011, 12:27 AM
Oh wonderful, now we might get another paranormal (wishes it was reality) show. Or maybe another group of idiots chasing down shadows and figments of there imaginations. Hell I would rather watch phony wrestling than another one of those are you kidding paranormal shows.

Fact is Eureka should have been shelved 2 seasons ago (and thankfully it wasn't W-13) - That being said, it was much better after they dumped the daughter and sister.

tomstone
August 9th, 2011, 12:44 AM
To get this straight, we still get a 5th Season, but after that its over?

I just have a big Questionmark over my head. I thought that they have Eureka split into 2 parts a Season because they cant shoot the Episodes so fast. Now Eureka is cancelled, but they are so far into production of Season 5 that they may just as well finish it?

Thunderstorm
August 9th, 2011, 12:50 AM
The Deadline article I linked to above says they have 2 weeks left of shooting for Season 5 which is 13 episodes. At this point, the plans are still to air it, but things can always change between now and next summer.

Sateda
August 9th, 2011, 12:54 AM
Because of the way Eureka is aired it is essentially aired one full year after it is filmed. Heck, season five was ordered last year just after the first half of season 4 had aired.

The current season 4.5 was completed last summer, the team was hopeful that it would air by this past spring, which didn't happen.

The entirety of Season five will wrap production in two weeks time, and the entire team seems to have been taken off guard by the cancellation.

Obviously now that the 6 episode season six has been axed, unless a miracle happens there will be no proper ending to the series.

SaberBlade
August 9th, 2011, 01:20 AM
I bet they'll stretch those final 13 episodes out for as long as possible. Perhaps a five month gap after episode 6. I can't say I am surprised. Only Syfy would think slapping in a 10 month gap in the middle of a show is a good idea, and then seem surprised when ratings don't meet expectations when it returns.


Obviously now that the 6 episode season six has been axed, unless a miracle happens there will be no proper ending to the series.

Well they knew season five would have 13 episodes, so I'd bet my money on them aiming for a cliffhanger. Best guess is they'd change it to be resolved at the end or write something new.

Quartz
August 9th, 2011, 01:34 AM
SyFy (Sci Fi) has been accused of this (non-support of flagship programs) before. Ironically enough, EUReKA was blamed. It's pretty obvious no one at the network really has a clue...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3BB8yu9-zo

meo3000
August 9th, 2011, 03:37 AM
That network is run by a bunch of morons.

IcarusAbides
August 9th, 2011, 04:18 AM
I'm not sad to see the show end as IMO it's been going downhill for a while, however the way in which syfy have handled this is so very amateur and I hope for the sake of the people who really like the show that Season 5 can wrap up the show and not end on a cliffhanger.

Skydiver
August 9th, 2011, 04:58 AM
They were originally renewed for s5 and part of s6, i wonder if there was some disagreement between the show creators and skiffy and they just ended it if the debate couldn't reach a compromise

FrodoFraggins
August 9th, 2011, 05:01 AM
I'm not sad to see the show end as IMO it's been going downhill for a while, however the way in which syfy have handled this is so very amateur and I hope for the sake of the people who really like the show that Season 5 can wrap up the show and not end on a cliffhanger.


SyFy has never shown an interest in providing closure to their shows and so this is no surprise.

I don't remember seeing any other network promise a season or partial season of a show and then take it back. SyFy has done it twice, first with Farscape and now with Eureka. Farscape was concluded because the studio found the funding to do so and SyFy bid to air it after it was filmed. Hopefully the production company of Eureka can do the same.

Briangate78
August 9th, 2011, 05:54 AM
They were originally renewed for s5 and part of s6, i wonder if there was some disagreement between the show creators and skiffy and they just ended it if the debate couldn't reach a compromise

Something certainly happened, for them to order more eps then change their mind, something happened. Gotta say I am shocked that one of the more successful series is being canceled. I always saw Eureka ending by the producers hands.

Inquisitor
August 9th, 2011, 06:12 AM
Given that SyFy reverses its decisions, we can only hope it'll reverse it again. I wouldn't be surprised if S05 ended in a cliff hanger, and the audience deserves closure.

You can't expect to keep viewers if you keep screwing them over. Do they forget that it's the viewers that determines whether or not advertises will buy advertising slots?

What I find surprising is that the ratings have been fairly constant over the last couple of seasons, yet they decide to cancel it now? Seems like bad faith to me.

I always say Eureka ending by a catastrophic explosion destroying the whole town while everyone successfully evacuated.

Everlovin
August 9th, 2011, 06:53 AM
Like I said, it's getting so there's nothing on SyFy I want to watch. :S

That being said, with all the seasons (counting partial seasons separately) it will have run for 7 years. A great run!

I'll miss it terribly.

SaberBlade
August 9th, 2011, 07:52 AM
I always say Eureka ending by a catastrophic explosion destroying the whole town while everyone successfully evacuated.

I'd like to see Eureka end by a project going out of control and destroying a satellite in space with the SyFy logo, and the screen goes blank as to suggest the signal has been interrupted.

Or do that, but end the show with 5 minutes of annoying static so people change channel.

Sateda
August 9th, 2011, 08:54 AM
SyFy could not have handled this any worse.


@jaimepaglia
Did final playback for the #Eureka S4.5 finale & turned in the script for S5 finale. You won't believe what's in store. Thanks to our team!
6 Aug


@jaimepaglia
[email protected]: So for #Eureka, Season 4.5 is airing now & we've already announced Season 5 & 6 plus a holiday episode. Hope that clarifies things!
6 Aug


@jaimepaglia
Heartfelt thanks to all our #Eureka fans for the incredible support. You're the reason we do what we do. It has been a privilege. We hope to be able to give you, the characters, and #Eureka a proper send-off. We're doing all we can to make that happen. But whatever happens, you have a season and a half of fantastic new #Eureka episodes to come through next year. It only gets better. All my thanks to our amazing cast, crew and creative team for their phenomenal work on these 76 episodes of #Eureka. You're the best.
2 hours ago

Everlovin
August 9th, 2011, 09:32 AM
SyFy has a history of handling things badly.

Zaany
August 9th, 2011, 10:55 AM
Go SyFy !!!:comeon::lol: :mad:
31380

Galileo_Galilee
August 9th, 2011, 01:21 PM
Sigh. Another big screw up. Why do I even bother with this retarded channel.

Killdeer
August 9th, 2011, 02:04 PM
Wow. :( This is upsetting. After the news last week, I was getting used to the idea of it ending, but now? I would be ok if we have a proper ending, but from what I'm hearing, they're only a couple of weeks or so from wrapping up filming on S5. :(

Galileo_Galilee
August 9th, 2011, 02:10 PM
Well, at least we did get five seasons. That is actually a really good run on TV. I seriously doubt it would've gotten that much on a network.

Killdeer
August 9th, 2011, 02:13 PM
Saying goodbye to Eureka from Wil Wheaton (http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2011/08/saying-goodbye-to-eureka.html)

It turns out that the network formerly-known as Sci-Fi changed its mind, and took back the six episode sixth season. Eureka will have to wrap up season five and the entire series with the episode that starts filming on Thursday. I know they'll have to do some rewriting, so I'm hopeful that Bob Newhart is available.*

And from a CNN article (http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/09/cast-crew-react-to-eureka-cancellation/) -

Co-executive producer Amy Berg explained the situation to fans: "We are the network's golden child in every way, except profit margins. Fact is, #Eureka is an expensive show to make. And we could not maintain the quality of our show with the cuts it would take to make us profitable for Syfy's new parent company. Our creative execs at Syfy fought hard to keep us. Trust me, they LOVE us. We just couldn't make the numbers work."

Browncoat1984
August 9th, 2011, 02:34 PM
I still don't believe this. Its even worse hitting than Stargate was because at least I could accept Stargate because of lower ratings. They tell us to tune in and when we do and reward them with ratings this is how they respond? I'd love to see Craig Engler justify this to fans the way he tried to justify SGU's cancellation, but he can't. Not the way SyFy handled this. I was giving Alphas a shot but now I won't anymore. I'm tired of this crap. At least FOX supports Fringe despite being the 18th most watched show (out of 20) on the network. I wish SyFy would show the same support to Eureka, which is the 2nd most watched scripted show on the network.

Ironic, because before Fringe FOX had a bad rep for sci-fi but they've shown nothing but support, saying even last week (right before Eureka was canceled) that "in order for Fringe to continue we just want the ratings we got right now" - and Fringe can't be any less expensive to produce than Eureka, while Eureka is tops, Fringe is more like the best kept secret.

At least I still have The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones and Fringe and Doctor Who. Hopefully Russel T. Davies decides to stick with Torchwood (since Starz said all that Torchwood needs to continue is the full support of Davies) and that show continues.

maxbo
August 9th, 2011, 02:37 PM
That article from producer Amy Berg answers my question - it was about profit margins and whether Eureka could maintain its quality with less money.

Although I understand it, that doesn't lessen my disappointment. Bummer. :(

pisces27
August 9th, 2011, 03:36 PM
SyFy logo...Imagine Greater....I am and it's not you. I'm running out of shows and reasons to watch their network.

Briangate78
August 9th, 2011, 04:01 PM
Eureka's numbers for last night...

2,248,000 Million viewers
A18 - 49 0.7

Does not have canceled written on those numbers. Gotta say I am shocked but obviously something went wrong on the production end of things.

I do feel we may get something in the future after Season 5.

ScifigirlSG
August 9th, 2011, 04:13 PM
This is sad..:(

Morbo
August 9th, 2011, 05:39 PM
Remember how people sent lots of letters to the network and saved the original Star Trek?
And then lots of people saved the recent show Jericho by sending lots of nuts?

Let's start a campaign to save Eureka by sending the network boxes of killer bees, and mad cow disease.

DigiFluid
August 9th, 2011, 06:00 PM
Kinda sucks, I'll miss it, but it's not the show it used to be.

On the upside, I can scratch another Syfylis show off the list of things I watch.

Hohenzollern
August 9th, 2011, 06:12 PM
This is unfortunate for those that invested time in viewing the show, and the actors/workers that enjoyed the experience of telling the story of that show.

I had not seen the show, Eureka, in some time. Frankly; after how "SyFy" handled SGU (badly) I simply am NO LONGER willing to invest time in viewing ANY of their offerings.

It seems quite likely they will just yank, whatever it is I would have been interested in viewing, for more wrestling or more of those buffoons stumbling about old buildings in the dark.

Morbo
August 9th, 2011, 07:26 PM
For those of you who follow me on G+, I posted an open letter to NBC UNiversal on it.

MIZA
August 9th, 2011, 09:36 PM
I am not surprised Eureka was all over the place when you do half season and this and that people get annoyed and ratings go down. The sad part is I was tired of Eureka anyway

Morbo
August 10th, 2011, 04:23 AM
its true, syfy has always mismanaged their shows.
they shoot themselves in the foot, but they don't seem to understand it. but they feel it.

Steelbox
August 10th, 2011, 05:33 AM
There goes another one, I'm terribly sad about this, such good show going down the drain lately.

maxbo
August 10th, 2011, 06:45 AM
Eureka's numbers for last night...

2,248,000 Million viewers
A18 - 49 0.7

Does not have canceled written on those numbers. Gotta say I am shocked but obviously something went wrong on the production end of things.

I do feel we may get something in the future after Season 5.

I also believed there was a good chance we would get more after Season 5, until I read that filming for Season 5 is almost complete. If there is nothing firm before filming is done then I don't hold out much hope of seeing more later. :(

If the ratings remain steady, then maybe, just maybe there could be the possibility of movies down the line. *crosses fingers, eyes, toes, etc.*

This is so sad because I just started regularly watching Eureka again and was looking forward to another couple of seasons. It sounds like Eureka could have continued under the old guard, but the new owners are more fiscally conservative. That may be good for Syfy's bottom line, but it sucks if you're a fan of a long-running expensive show.

Everlovin
August 10th, 2011, 07:40 AM
I also believed there was a good chance we would get more after Season 5, until I read that filming for Season 5 is almost complete. If there is nothing firm before filming is done then I don't hold out much hope of seeing more later. :(

If the ratings remain steady, then maybe, just maybe there could be the possibility of movies down the line. *crosses fingers, eyes, toes, etc.*

This is so sad because I just started regularly watching Eureka again and was looking forward to another couple of seasons. It sounds like Eureka could have continued under the old guard, but the new owners are more fiscally conservative. That may be good for Syfy's bottom line, but it sucks if you're a fan of a long-running expensive show.

It also does not bode well for quality programming. More pseudo-reality shows, wrestling, and bad - bad movies.

maxbo
August 10th, 2011, 07:44 AM
It also does not bode well for quality programming. More pseudo-reality shows, wrestling, and bad - bad movies.

So, sadly true. :(

samcartersg1
August 10th, 2011, 08:18 AM
Eureka Stars, Showrunner React to Shocking Cancellation; Syfy Orders Extra Series Finale Episode

http://www.eonline.com/news/watch_with_kristin/eureka_stars_showrunner_react_shocking/257194?cmpid=rss-000000-rssfeed-365-kristin&utm_source=eonline&utm_medium=rssfeeds&utm_campaign=rss_kristin

Briangate78
August 10th, 2011, 09:24 AM
I also believed there was a good chance we would get more after Season 5, until I read that filming for Season 5 is almost complete. If there is nothing firm before filming is done then I don't hold out much hope of seeing more later. :(

If the ratings remain steady, then maybe, just maybe there could be the possibility of movies down the line. *crosses fingers, eyes, toes, etc.*

This is so sad because I just started regularly watching Eureka again and was looking forward to another couple of seasons. It sounds like Eureka could have continued under the old guard, but the new owners are more fiscally conservative. That may be good for Syfy's bottom line, but it sucks if you're a fan of a long-running expensive show.

Well I was sorta correct, Syfy just ordered one more episode to be the finale, so looks like we will get that closure.

It truly is bad, when a network wants a series but cannot afford it and has to cancel it. Normally a show is not profitable and so they cancel it, that is not the case with Eureka.

Killdeer
August 10th, 2011, 09:53 AM
I'm glad to hear of the extra episode order. That's something anyway.

maxbo
August 10th, 2011, 11:37 AM
Well I was sorta correct, Syfy just ordered one more episode to be the finale, so looks like we will get that closure.

It truly is bad, when a network wants a series but cannot afford it and has to cancel it. Normally a show is not profitable and so they cancel it, that is not the case with Eureka.

Yeah, that extra episode is better than nothing. And, I agree that it is sad when a network can't afford to continue a series even though they wish they could. Financial reality is a *****. That's why I'm wondering if all future shows will be in the 13-episode format instead of the more expensive 20-episode format.


I'm glad to hear of the extra episode order. That's something anyway.

Yes, it is something and I'm grateful for this small favor.

FrodoFraggins
August 10th, 2011, 11:54 AM
It's great that they are allowing closure by ordering an extra episode. Now they need to learn not to announce green-lit seasons until all of the i's are dotted and the t's crossed. It's inconceivable that a network can promise the fans and writers an extra season and then back out of it. Real networks don't pull crap like that.

It's hard for scripted shows to match the profit margins of the nonscripted crap that airs on the channel. They really need to rename the network at some point.

DigiFluid
August 10th, 2011, 12:49 PM
Wait....the original order was for a 13 episode season 5. So the additional episode order takes it up to being a 14 episode final season?

Killdeer
August 10th, 2011, 01:11 PM
Wait....the original order was for a 13 episode season 5. So the additional episode order takes it up to being a 14 episode final season?

Yes. This year's Christmas episode is part of S5's order, and then we'll have 13 episodes next year.

DigiFluid
August 10th, 2011, 01:34 PM
Oh okay, I follow. Thanks.

IcarusAbides
August 10th, 2011, 03:56 PM
Any chance this extra episode could be a kind of feature length finale.

DigiFluid
August 10th, 2011, 04:09 PM
It'd be nice, but I wouldn't bank on it. The fact that Syfylis ordered another episode at all is unprecedented kindness on their part. Lightning isn't likely to strike twice.

maxbo
August 10th, 2011, 04:09 PM
Any chance this extra episode could be a kind of feature length finale.

That would be a good idea, especially at this late date. IMO, Syfy should consider a feature length finale as a damage-control move to try to regain goodwill.

Briangate78
August 10th, 2011, 04:13 PM
Any chance this extra episode could be a kind of feature length finale.

It could happen, I can see there being like a 2 Hour finale.

BTW, I think Syfy should change their mission statement from "Imagine Greater" to "Indian Givers" lol.

Skydiver
August 10th, 2011, 07:43 PM
their motto is 'imagine greater...profits....and we'll do anything to get them'

Killdeer
August 10th, 2011, 08:00 PM
I think a double-length final episode would be fantastic (I'm visualizing a two-hour wrap-up finale), but I agree with DigiFluid that it's probably not likely. I'm grateful that we get this much, I really am, considering other shows that haven't been so lucky.

I'm slowly getting used to the idea of no more Eureka, but it's still a little depressing. This has been my "cheer me up" show for several years now, even when it wasn't at its best, and I'm really really going to miss it. I guess that's what the DVDs are for though, right? ;)

It does make me wonder about Warehouse 13's future though. Will Syfy's apparent five-season rule apply to them too? That would get them through 2013. But that would also mean the show's already almost half-way through its run, and to me it feels like it's just really getting started. Weird. :S

I think part of the problem (for me) is that five 13 episode seasons just doesn't feel like five regular-length seasons does. SGA had five seasons and ended with 100 episodes. Eureka will have had five seasons and will end with 77. If Warehouse 13 runs for five seasons, it will have about 65 episodes. *shrugs*

Briangate78
August 10th, 2011, 08:05 PM
I think a double-length final episode would be fantastic (I'm visualizing a two-hour wrap-up finale), but I agree with DigiFluid that it's probably not likely. I'm grateful that we get this much, I really am, considering other shows that haven't been so lucky.

I'm slowly getting used to the idea of no more Eureka, but it's still a little depressing. This has been my "cheer me up" show for several years now, even when it wasn't at its best, and I'm really really going to miss it. I guess that's what the DVDs are for though, right? ;)

It does make me wonder about Warehouse 13's future though. Will Syfy's apparent five-season rule apply to them too? That would get them through 2013.

Anytime a show gets to it's 5th season, it truly takes a lot to get it past there. Increased ratings certainly help, but the older a series gets as you know the expenses get higher.

As per W13 talks for a 4th season renewal are already in the works, what will they do if it makes it to a 5th season and still the higest rated show on the network? That truly is a good question. W13 is even beating Wrestling on Syfy.

I'm happy that they will at least get a final episode to wrap up things. None of the Stargates got that.

Gem of Tigress
August 11th, 2011, 09:40 AM
ouch, Syfy does it again :mckay: never really watched the show, but i feel for the fans. :(

Browncoat1984
August 11th, 2011, 11:38 PM
I'm sorry, but when have you ever heard a network that is not the network-that-shall-not-be-named doing this to a POPULAR TV series that was its #2-#1 highest rated original scripted series? None. The only time this may have happened is when a series went on for like 9-10 seasons like The X-Files and Smallville, but when it lasts that long I don't mind it ending. But SyFy does this to EVERY series. I'm sorry, but series should be canceled for two reasons: 1) low ratings (SGU) 2) Producers end it on their own terms (Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica, Lost, and hopefully Fringe, but that's yet to be seen). And no network...NO NETWORK. HAS. EVER. PROMISED. A SEASON. AND. TAKEN. IT. BACK!!!! NONE! Unless I'm missing something, SYFY IS THE ONLY NETWORK THAT DOES THIS. And not only have they done this once, they did this TWICE with Farscape. And you could even say they did it three times when they promised future Stargate Sg-1 and Atlantis movies and didn't deliver. Yes, I know that MGM was the fault for not getting the movies, but nothing is stopping SyFy from ordering a couple movies for the fans themselves. I mean, they have enough money to make crappy b-grade movies that nobody cares about.

No network in their right mind would pull this sort of crap on fans. Especially a network that was supposedly made for this sort of programming and is supposed to understand sci-fi fans. Not even TNT, who renewed Falling Skies for a second season after just one episode would pull something like this on a loyal audience that was giving them numbers.

Gatefan1976
August 11th, 2011, 11:48 PM
Here's a thought, It wasn't the networks choice but the people who own them. The network apparently wanted more Eureka, just the bean counters moved in and made a MASSIVE mess. Syfy's PR dept truly needs to be gone, every crisis that comes up they handled like a ham fisted mess, starting way back at the end of Farscape. Silence is sometimes golden, and these Igjits need to know when to shut thier mouths.

Angela V
August 12th, 2011, 01:38 AM
It does make me wonder about Warehouse 13's future though. Will Syfy's apparent five-season rule apply to them too? That would get them through 2013. But that would also mean the show's already almost half-way through its run, and to me it feels like it's just really getting started. Weird. :S


And Sanctuary will be in it's 5th season too in 2013. SyFy can kill two shows in one year. Yippee. :tealc44:

Ian-S
August 12th, 2011, 05:25 AM
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.

Joe
August 12th, 2011, 12:52 PM
And Sanctuary will be in it's 5th season too in 2013. SyFy can kill two shows in one year. Yippee. :tealc44:

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

Angela V
August 12th, 2011, 01:41 PM
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
August 12th, 2011, 02:48 PM
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. :p

DigiFluid
August 12th, 2011, 03:44 PM
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
August 12th, 2011, 04:57 PM
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
August 12th, 2011, 05:57 PM
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
August 12th, 2011, 06:26 PM
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
August 12th, 2011, 06:36 PM
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 :D

Skydiver
August 12th, 2011, 07:00 PM
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
August 13th, 2011, 01:20 PM
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
August 13th, 2011, 05:28 PM
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
August 13th, 2011, 09:05 PM
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
August 13th, 2011, 09:13 PM
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. :S *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
August 13th, 2011, 09:29 PM
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
August 13th, 2011, 09:41 PM
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
August 13th, 2011, 10:14 PM
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
August 13th, 2011, 10:39 PM
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
August 14th, 2011, 07:11 AM
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. :S *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
August 14th, 2011, 07:59 AM
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
August 14th, 2011, 08:43 AM
They got the Season Five renewal in August 2010 - here's the press release.

LINK (http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2010/08/17/eureka-renewed-by-syfy-for-a-5th-season/60187/)

Killdeer
August 14th, 2011, 08:55 AM
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 (http://www.eonline.com/news/watch_with_kristin/warehouse_13_eureka_stars_dish_on/214784)....

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.

Skydiver
August 14th, 2011, 09:02 AM
so basically they were told they got 6 episodes, then they were taken back

my PERSONAL interpretation.....eureka powers that be likely weren't too enthused about only 6 episodes and there was possibly some negotiations/debates, etc.

and it may have resulted in something along the line of 'only 6 episodes is garbage we can't do it in 6' and skiffy said 'fine, then dont' do it at all'....but then a compromise of 'ok, give us one more for this season' coupled with fan reactions and PR issues was reached.

Killdeer
August 14th, 2011, 09:06 AM
That could be. :S

Briangate78
August 15th, 2011, 12:08 PM
so basically they were told they got 6 episodes, then they were taken back

my PERSONAL interpretation.....eureka powers that be likely weren't too enthused about only 6 episodes and there was possibly some negotiations/debates, etc.

and it may have resulted in something along the line of 'only 6 episodes is garbage we can't do it in 6' and skiffy said 'fine, then dont' do it at all'....but then a compromise of 'ok, give us one more for this season' coupled with fan reactions and PR issues was reached.

Someone in Accounting screwed up, lol.

IcarusAbides
August 15th, 2011, 12:23 PM
How about they give them the budget for the six episodes and they make one feature length epic episode with the cash. :D

DigiFluid
August 15th, 2011, 01:12 PM
As usual, my own interpretation of events matches right up with sky's.

12OzMouse
August 15th, 2011, 02:31 PM
If this has been posted before, forgive me... But, I just saw a quote from Amy Berg, (Eureka producer) where she said that SyFy loves everything about Eureka except how much it costs to make it. She said that, (as we all surmised) the decision to cancel was purely dollars and cents. I just don't understand how they can take one of their most popular shows and make a kill decision before the 5th season has yet to air an episode. Unless they have a pretty good crystal ball, they have no idea how S5 is going to preform against the competition. But, they do know that for another $50 bucks or so they can produce a few more Ghosthunters eps, I guess that's how the new management's going to run it from here on out....

Skydiver
August 15th, 2011, 05:21 PM
thing is, and i don't defend skiffy, but as shows go on and on and on, the cost raises - cast and crew get raises everytime their contract is negotiated usually, and the ratings fall....most shows, over time, shed viewers.

There are a few shows that are exemptions to this 'rule', NCIS for one, whose rating base seems to grow every year, but most of them lose.

Homer 120
August 17th, 2011, 10:31 AM
Aww :(

Ah well, it had a GOOD run. And at lest we actually GET A FINAL EPISODE! Which is more then SGA & SGU ever got.

MediaSavant
August 17th, 2011, 03:05 PM
thing is, and i don't defend skiffy, but as shows go on and on and on, the cost raises - cast and crew get raises everytime their contract is negotiated usually, and the ratings fall....most shows, over time, shed viewers.

Not only that, but the median age of the show grows older and more viewers are outside what is considered the ideal ad targets of 18-40 or 25-54. Eureka's median age is already 51. It'll probably be 53 in two years.

Smaller ratings with older viewers bring less revenue.

Browncoat1984
August 17th, 2011, 10:42 PM
I wonder if there's a chance of another network seeing the success of the show and picking it up? I mean, its not like it didn't get ratings, the ratings are there...thing is, with it being primarily a SyFY show and not like Stargate (owned by MGM) I have a feeling SyFy wouldn't let that happen unless it was NBC that picked it up, and over on NBC they have the same issues SyFy does (Chuck, Heroes).

DSG1
August 17th, 2011, 11:09 PM
I loath this network and always will. I am boycotting them and refuse to watch anymore shows. Every time I invest in a show, they cancel it. They can take their excuse for ratings and shove them. They are just too cheap.

DSG1
August 17th, 2011, 11:14 PM
They never go past season 5 of ANY show. SG1 was on showtime for 5 years, SG1, lasted 5 years, total 10, that was a wonder, SGA, 5 years, although, Caprica got cut down in it's prime as did SGU. Its a wonder they let Eureka last as long as it did, with it's long year season breaks and only 13 episodes?

I suspect, by this time next year if not sooner, it will be Warehouse 13 and Sanctuary will be canceled so I'm calling it now, who wants to take bets?

Every time they split a season, you can guarantee it will get canceled the following year. I thank god they didnt do split seasons with SG1, that would have killed it.

Instead of having season 5 like we should right now, they are only showing us the tail end of season 4 and to see season 5 we have to wait another long year? 2 years to wait for a new season is too damn long for my liking. I have the DVDs to keep me company. I wont be buying s5 though nope. Syfy wont get another dime of my money.

No thank you. I am done waiting. Goodbye Syfy, nice knowing you.

It has NOTHING TO DO WITH RATINGS. ALL TO DO with being CHEAP as dirt!

MediaSavant
August 18th, 2011, 07:35 AM
I wonder if there's a chance of another network seeing the success of the show and picking it up? I mean, its not like it didn't get ratings, the ratings are there...thing is, with it being primarily a SyFY show and not like Stargate (owned by MGM) I have a feeling SyFy wouldn't let that happen unless it was NBC that picked it up, and over on NBC they have the same issues SyFy does (Chuck, Heroes).

What are you talking about?

It's ratings aren't that high compared to shows on other networks.

Check this out:

http://geekfurious.blogspot.com/2011/08/geek-tv-ratings-update-15-august-2011.html

A bigger network demands even higher ratings. Smaller networks would have the same profitability issues Syfy had. The show costs more than the revenue it would bring in.

Spimman
August 18th, 2011, 10:24 AM
The direction of this network since they switched from SciFi to SyFy(lis) is getting worse, I guess the initial infection is spreading from the disease. This really sucks because the US really needs a network that supports scripted original science-fiction and I feel like we're losing that.

MediaSavant
August 18th, 2011, 12:17 PM
The direction of this network since they switched from SciFi to SyFy(lis) is getting worse, I guess the initial infection is spreading from the disease. This really sucks because the US really needs a network that supports scripted original science-fiction and I feel like we're losing that.

The problem is that scripted original science-fiction costs a lot to produce and the ratings aren't high enough to earn enough revenue to support it. People who work on these shows and produce them need to be paid. It's not a charitable activity.

The C3 ratings would be higher if scifi fans didn't DVR so much. In a way, the fans themselves contribute to the lack of viability of these shows. If they'd watch more of the commercials, the shows would earn more money.

As a result, the network has no choice but to seek out cheaper programming. Not only are reality shows cheaper to produce, their viewers watch live.

Galileo_Galilee
August 18th, 2011, 01:23 PM
Sanctuary is being shown on Chiller now.

Gatefan1976
August 18th, 2011, 05:53 PM
The problem is that scripted original science-fiction costs a lot to produce and the ratings aren't high enough to earn enough revenue to support it. People who work on these shows and produce them need to be paid. It's not a charitable activity.

The C3 ratings would be higher if scifi fans didn't DVR so much. In a way, the fans themselves contribute to the lack of viability of these shows. If they'd watch more of the commercials, the shows would earn more money.
As a result, the network has no choice but to seek out cheaper programming. Not only are reality shows cheaper to produce, their viewers watch live.

I've said that before MS, no one wanted to listen. :(

tomstone
August 18th, 2011, 07:08 PM
The problem is that scripted original science-fiction costs a lot to produce and the ratings aren't high enough to earn enough revenue to support it. People who work on these shows and produce them need to be paid. It's not a charitable activity.

The C3 ratings would be higher if scifi fans didn't DVR so much. In a way, the fans themselves contribute to the lack of viability of these shows. If they'd watch more of the commercials, the shows would earn more money.

As a result, the network has no choice but to seek out cheaper programming. Not only are reality shows cheaper to produce, their viewers watch live.

Isnt the whole System based on those Nelson Ratings or whatever they are called? So basically a small Group of People is used to decide all of this. If we watch live or not is not at all important since our views are not counted anyways. The same goes for the usage of DVR, even if they could check who watches what channel for how long, the DVR would still count as a viewer since it still has to tune in to the certain channel.

Rocky89
August 18th, 2011, 08:17 PM
And Sanctuary will be in it's 5th season too in 2013. SyFy can kill two shows in one year. Yippee. :tealc44:


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).


They never go past season 5 of ANY show. SG1 was on showtime for 5 years, SG1, lasted 5 years, total 10, that was a wonder, SGA, 5 years, although, Caprica got cut down in it's prime as did SGU. Its a wonder they let Eureka last as long as it did, with it's long year season breaks and only 13 episodes?

I suspect, by this time next year if not sooner, it will be Warehouse 13 and Sanctuary will be canceled so I'm calling it now, who wants to take bets?

Every time they split a season, you can guarantee it will get canceled the following year. I thank god they didnt do split seasons with SG1, that would have killed it.

Every day I hope Sanctuary will be moved back to Fri, most fans are still tweeting to Syfy to move the show back. That should tell Syfy that fans don't want it to stay on Mon, and Syfy has replied to them, like, 4 times now. This is from today- http://bit.ly/qWYpaU

Most say the main thing Sanctuary has going for it is that it doesn't cost as much as Eureka, W13 or Alphas, so I hope that keeps working for them, and that they go home in S4 because I can't and don't want to take a full season of bad ratings.

Btw, is Sanctuary showed in HD on Syfy? It is on Space. ;)


Sanctuary is being shown on Chiller now.

How good is that for the show? Also, this is a good article for it. :)

http://www.worldscreen.com/articles/display/31046

Naomi
August 19th, 2011, 03:58 AM
The direction of this network since they switched from SciFi to SyFy(lis) is getting worse, I guess the initial infection is spreading from the disease. This really sucks because the US really needs a network that supports scripted original science-fiction and I feel like we're losing that.I agree. I think the name change was the first clear sign that the channel's PTB were no longer interested in becoming the, or possibly even being a, channel with primarily science fiction/fantasy programming. Instituting a name that distances itself from its core audience was not a good sign.

At this point I think getting involved in one of the channel's original scripted series is a bad bet. If respectable ratings, and fan support, are not enough to at least allow a series to have an end that is announced well in advance, and fully addressed in the final season, then I cannot think of any good reason to bother with watching the channel. Eureka isn't the first time Cee-Fee disrespected, and disregarded, fans. I doubt that it is the last time, because Cee-Fee's PTB do not display much understanding of, nor respect for, science fiction/fantasy fan loyalty. It is the last time for me, though. I still love science fiction, and fantasy. I'm just tired of Skiffy.

Cee-Fee may as well go back to its roots, when all it did was re-run old science fiction/fantasy shows.

Eureka, you will be missed.

Skydiver
August 19th, 2011, 04:33 AM
What I find funny....BBC America consistently airs more scripted scifi drama than the scifi channel does :)

BBCA seems very proud of their 'supernatural saturday' and the BBC in general seems more willing to take chances on shows...they still cancel them, and some only get 6 episodes, but at least there's a try

I do also think that skiffy, owned by NBC, has bought out so many channels and are trying to juggle so much.....I personally think they've overextended themselves and are kinda struggling to make ends meet on the corporate level. hence the focus on what many of us term 'crappy ratings makers', reality shows....NBC as a whole likely needs money and they'll stick iwth the proven ratings and money makers and 'expensive indulgences' like scripted drama are just that, luxuries

Spimman
August 19th, 2011, 06:30 AM
I do also think that skiffy, owned by NBC, has bought out so many channels and are trying to juggle so much.....I personally think they've overextended themselves and are kinda struggling to make ends meet on the corporate level

Very good point

MediaSavant
August 19th, 2011, 08:14 AM
Isnt the whole System based on those Nelson Ratings or whatever they are called? So basically a small Group of People is used to decide all of this. If we watch live or not is not at all important since our views are not counted anyways. The same goes for the usage of DVR, even if they could check who watches what channel for how long, the DVR would still count as a viewer since it still has to tune in to the certain channel.

It doesn't matter if you are in the Nielsen sample. Someone else--a lot of someone elses--ARE in the sample who behave just like you.

BTW--there are research companies right now collecting set-top box data anonymously and packaging it for various purposes. You could be part of that research and not even know it.

MediaSavant
August 19th, 2011, 08:33 AM
What I find funny....BBC America consistently airs more scripted scifi drama than the scifi channel does :)

BBCA seems very proud of their 'supernatural saturday' and the BBC in general seems more willing to take chances on shows...they still cancel them, and some only get 6 episodes, but at least there's a try.

BBCA's advantage is that they aren't the primary licensee for the shows they air. Any American TV network produces just as many genre shows as the BBC does and with more episodes.

BBC America is to these shows what foreign networks are to American shows. They don't have to pay a lot to air them. That's a good thing because their ratings are really low. For example, recently "The Best of Dr. Who" delivered less than 300,000 viewers and BSG reruns do less than 200,000.


I do also think that skiffy, owned by NBC, has bought out so many channels and are trying to juggle so much.....I personally think they've overextended themselves and are kinda struggling to make ends meet on the corporate level. hence the focus on what many of us term 'crappy ratings makers', reality shows....NBC as a whole likely needs money and they'll stick iwth the proven ratings and money makers and 'expensive indulgences' like scripted drama are just that, luxuries

Syfy is no different from any other network. Even BBC America has Top Gear. Look at how many American reality shows started in Britain or Europe: American Idol (Pop Idol), Dancing with the Stars, Big Brother, Kitchen Nightmares. And dozens more.

Galileo_Galilee
August 20th, 2011, 10:58 AM
American Idol and Dancing With The Stars are very different than reality shows like Big Brother and it's ilk.

Everlovin
August 20th, 2011, 11:34 AM
And then there's little ol' me. Who doesn't own a dvr and probably never will. Who despises reality tv in any form. Who's getting fed up with SyFy.

CyberPope
August 20th, 2011, 04:24 PM
Well, I guess SyFy has another free hour to fill with God**** wrestling! :(

Skydiver
August 20th, 2011, 06:22 PM
When enough people - and i'm not talking just fans here, i'm talking regular people - stop watching the ratings will fall and Skiffy will change their programming.

I do think that reality tv is on a downward slide, simply because there are only so many ideas out there and shows keep getting more and more far fetched...but I do think that downward slide will take many more years

Everlovin
August 20th, 2011, 06:32 PM
When enough people - and i'm not talking just fans here, i'm talking regular people - stop watching the ratings will fall and Skiffy will change their programming.

I do think that reality tv is on a downward slide, simply because there are only so many ideas out there and shows keep getting more and more far fetched...but I do think that downward slide will take many more years

From your keyboard to God's ears - or tptb at various networks at any rate.

Skydiver
August 20th, 2011, 06:45 PM
I think, over all, people are getting bored with them. Survivor only got renewed for one season and its ratings are slipping, as are others.

Look at how silly some of them are getting....hillybilly handfishing?

can you really see undercover boss running forever without folks catching on? or 'take the money and run'

Overall they keep having to come up with more and more ideas, and i do think they are starting to run out of viable ones.

BUT


there's still the 'train wreck' factor of things like toddlers and tiaras, or the family drama of deadliest catch (half the show's appeal is the family dynamics on some of the crews)...some have a certain appeal. Others a limited appeal.

How many times can someone watch America's got talent before you get sick of it?

I don't think it'll ever go away, but I do see things getting more and more outrageous as the years go on

Galileo_Galilee
August 20th, 2011, 07:36 PM
Hillbilly Handfishing is the kind of show you watch once, for once you've seen one episode you're truly seen them all. Plus the biggest problem with reality shows is the majority of people on those shows are very annoying and unlikeable. And I don't understand why these people get to be so popular. In the real world, those kinds of people get their asses beat.

Naomi
August 21st, 2011, 07:58 AM
Shows such as "Heroes" and "True Blood" demonstrate that people who don't consider themselves hardcore scifi/fantasy fans will watch shows from those genres, and such shows can become media darlings, getting all kinds of hype. Over the years, Skiffy had the opportunity to build, and nurture, a core audience of fans. Then, expand upon the viewer base with quality scripted programming, and working hard to get the word out.

Even when they have good programs -- Eureka, and others -- Skiffy doesn't build up an audience because they don't advertise the shows, or the channel, to casual viewers. Running commercials about Skiffy solely on Skiffy is not going to build up viewership. I think the money spent on re-branding the channel's name would have been better spent getting the word out about Skiffy and its programs. Re-brand casual viewers perception of the genre. To me, currently Skiffy is less about quality original programming, and more about trying to make a fast buck with junky "reality" show kitsch. When I think of today's Skiffy, I certainly don't think of "Taken," "The Lost Room," or "Tin Man."


How many times can someone watch America's got talent before you get sick of it? Me? Once.

warmbeachbrat
August 21st, 2011, 07:25 PM
I do think that reality tv is on a downward slide, simply because there are only so many ideas out there and shows keep getting more and more far fetched...but I do think that downward slide will take many more years

Oh man, I hope so!

MediaSavant
August 22nd, 2011, 02:06 PM
When enough people - and i'm not talking just fans here, i'm talking regular people - stop watching the ratings will fall and Skiffy will change their programming.

I do think that reality tv is on a downward slide, simply because there are only so many ideas out there and shows keep getting more and more far fetched...but I do think that downward slide will take many more years

Last week:
Jersey Shore: 7.8 million viewers for the first airing, another 3.1 million viewers for the repeat right afterward and amazingly the median age is 23.

Pawn Stars: 5.5 million viewers @ 10:30 PM, 5.0 million viewers @10:00 PM Monday

WWE(USA): 5.2 million viewers at 9PM Monday, 4.9 million viewers at 10 PM.

Storage Wars: 5.0 million viewers @ 10:30 Wednesday, 4.5 million viewers @10:00

American Pickers: 3.4 million viewers.

Meanwhile, all Eureka could muster was 2.2 million viewers. Five different airings of Storage Wars and four different airings of Pawn Stars had more viewers than Eureka did and that's just Monday through Thursday.

IcarusAbides
August 22nd, 2011, 02:59 PM
Last week:
Jersey Shore: 7.8 million viewers for the first airing, another 3.1 million viewers for the repeat right afterward and amazingly the median age is 23.

Pawn Stars: 5.5 million viewers @ 10:30 PM, 5.0 million viewers @10:00 PM Monday

WWE(USA): 5.2 million viewers at 9PM Monday, 4.9 million viewers at 10 PM.

Storage Wars: 5.0 million viewers @ 10:30 Wednesday, 4.5 million viewers @10:00

American Pickers: 3.4 million viewers.

Meanwhile, all Eureka could muster was 2.2 million viewers. Five different airings of Storage Wars and four different airings of Pawn Stars had more viewers than Eureka did and that's just Monday through Thursday.

Number like that are so upsetting. It's the same here in the UK - Over 10 million people watched The X Factor, 5 million watched Big Brother, It seems all people want to watch these days is reality shows and other rubbish.

DigiFluid
August 22nd, 2011, 03:32 PM
Last week:
Jersey Shore: 7.8 million viewers for the first airing, another 3.1 million viewers for the repeat right afterward and amazingly the median age is 23.

Pawn Stars: 5.5 million viewers @ 10:30 PM, 5.0 million viewers @10:00 PM Monday

WWE(USA): 5.2 million viewers at 9PM Monday, 4.9 million viewers at 10 PM.

Storage Wars: 5.0 million viewers @ 10:30 Wednesday, 4.5 million viewers @10:00

American Pickers: 3.4 million viewers.

Meanwhile, all Eureka could muster was 2.2 million viewers. Five different airings of Storage Wars and four different airings of Pawn Stars had more viewers than Eureka did and that's just Monday through Thursday.
Every one of those is horribly misleading. Every network that airs those shows have massively larger subscriber bases than Syfylis. You'd have to do a more per-capita analysis.

Thunderstorm
August 22nd, 2011, 08:48 PM
Pawn Stars is A&E number 1 show (and I think their highest ever for their network). Also I like to watch it for the history of the various items, especially when they have things several hundred years old. So I don't consider it in the vein of the other shows.

MediaSavant
August 22nd, 2011, 08:57 PM
Every one of those is horribly misleading. Every network that airs those shows have massively larger subscriber bases than Syfylis. You'd have to do a more per-capita analysis.

WRONG.

Syfy caught up to all the major networks several years ago. Its subscriber base is the same size as all the networks shone.

Where do you get your research?

MediaSavant
August 22nd, 2011, 08:59 PM
Pawn Stars is A&E number 1 show (and I think their highest ever for their network). Also I like to watch it for the history of the various items, especially when they have things several hundred years old. So I don't consider it in the vein of the other shows.

Now, there you go.

It falls into the category of unscripted TV. No one involved is a member of the writers guild or the actors guild.

But, you like it. So, it doesn't count as one of those damned "reality shows".

Thunderstorm
August 22nd, 2011, 10:04 PM
Now, there you go.

It falls into the category of unscripted TV. No one involved is a member of the writers guild or the actors guild.

But, you like it. So, it doesn't count as one of those damned "reality shows".

It's got lost of history lessons in it so it's not strictly fluff. But If you only watched 5 min of it, I can see how you would get a different impression.I think it probably depends on how much you like history to sit thru the junk to get to the good stuff.I tried watching Storage Wars, thinking it would be along the same lines, but while a few epsiodes were interesting, it's turned into mostly bickering and back stabbing, etc so I don't watch it.

Galileo_Galilee
August 23rd, 2011, 07:50 AM
Reality shows are not unscripted TV. More like script lite TV.

For example, the Father on American Chopper was told to sue his sons for teh drama!

Skydiver
August 25th, 2011, 04:53 AM
pawn stars is like Antiques Roadshow on steroids.

what people don't 'get' is that a lot of the 'reality' shows, what you see isn't a documentary of a sort (this is what happened the 5 months we were there) but stuff is tweaked and rigged and manipulated. Anyone think survivor or Big Brother is just what randomly happens???? They deliberately cast to make sure there's conflict. The games that are played are made to tweak people and get them upset or ticked off.

There are others that are more a docudrama. like Deadliest Catch or Swords or some of the other shows....where most of what you see is what happened during the months they were there.

FOR ME, stuff like America's Got Talent....it plays into that whole 'i'm gonna be famous' dream that so many have....so they watch the show to dream about that. to 'cheer' for the little guy. and when you have stinkers that everyone talks about the next day....those people are SOOOOO cast just to give you something to talk about. You tihnk the person that cast Susan Boyle - who does the screening auditions before the person is put on the stage - didn't know EXACTLY what would happen??? They did it just for the interest factor.

Viewers often think all of these shows are just what 'happens' to happen....they're not. I remember a bit of a tiff between CBS and NBC, when the Sydney olympics were happening at the same time they were taping survivor australia....NBC sent out a chopper and found the 'set' for survivor......complete with 2 helicopters, 100 trailers and 3 satellite dishes. It was a full fledged town in the middle of the outback. So yeah, those people may be out there 'alone'....but they're surrounded by support staff.

Do you think it's pure coincidence that they always choose hot/warm climates? The easier it is for the 'survivors' to run around half naked the better it is to have that titillation factor.

Everlovin
August 25th, 2011, 05:37 AM
So to be completely off topic, but completely curious: where might Bizarre Foods with Andrew Zimmern - billed as a travel show; and Mythbusters fit in? My feel for these are more along the lines of documentary sort of thing. Humorous, but not scripted and not reality tv.

Browncoat1984
August 25th, 2011, 01:44 PM
@Everlovin I'm of the same opinion as you. I love Mythbusters and Dirty Jobs. Deadliest Catch is the only "reality" show I watch and that's because its an amazing, intense show that has everything a good show needs!

Galileo_Galilee
August 25th, 2011, 02:20 PM
I don't consider those shows reality shows. To me, a reality show is a popularity competition show, like Top Shots on the History Channel. It's not about the skills, it's not about finding things out, it's about who's the most popular. If it's a competition that has a vote, or it's more about the conflict between the people (cast), then it's a reality show.

I consider shows like Dirty Jobs a kind of Documentary because it is about showing how the job is done far more than the conflict between the people. American Chopper, for example, is not about showing people how the bikes are built but about the idiotic fighting between the sons and the father. If it was about how the bikes are built then I'd consider it more of a documentary than a reality show.

To repeat, reality shows are about the conflict and the popularity between the people, not about showing how something is done or how it works.

I don't know how to classify Mythbusters though.

Skydiver
August 25th, 2011, 05:26 PM
I almost classify mythbusters as educational. You walk away from the show learning something. You kinda do the same with Deadliest Catch although more emphasis on the danger of their surroundings than the job anymore.

I kinda see border wars, alaska rangers, animal cops etc as almost a docudrama. What happens is what happens...but they do sometimes present things to its fullest dramatic potential (will the dog survive?????? etc)

Skydiver
August 25th, 2011, 05:28 PM
aaaannnnnddd, you know....we are getting horribly off topic :)

is the topic of Eureka done?

If not we need to get back to it and we can more the reality show debate to its own thread in OT

Gatefan1976
August 25th, 2011, 09:22 PM
aaaannnnnddd, you know....we are getting horribly off topic :)
is the topic of Eureka done?

If not we need to get back to it and we can more the reality show debate to its own thread in OT

Can we have an explosion first??
I need a big explosion today


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIPprUxFap8

Chuckfan19
September 21st, 2011, 10:48 PM
I was so upset when I found out that Eureka has been cancelled and the next season would be its last

aintright
April 12th, 2012, 11:09 AM
*sigh* and so it begins .... the end that is *sigh* .... so sad!!

the cast was awesome at Dragon Con ... fun, funny, very fun - ny!!:D


teehee!!:jack_new15: