Stargate SG-1 Cancelled

[drummerboy6410]

What The **** Are They Thinking Cancelling The Best Show On Sci-fi

[rook818]

I don't believe the ratings had anything to do with the cancellation. If you examine the ratings for SGA and BSG they are pretty close to SG1. The biggest problem is the cost of the show.

As shows like SG1 go on and on they get more expensive. You not only have to pay the actors more and more but the writers, producers....everyone. Add the effects budget on top of that and you have a very expensive show. This is sadly going to be the hardest hurdle for the studio (MGM) finding a new home for it. No one wants an uber-expensive, mediorically rated (neisons) show...

SciFi channels has a pretty limited budget (where TV goes) and I'm sure they feel that by killing the show they are freeing oodles upon oodles of cash (and lets be honest, they will).

A contributing factor is the grossly broken neilson system which is in DIRE DIRE DIRE need of an overhaul.

IMHO, fans are best left to hope for a movie. Lets just pray it's not done by Devlin *shivers*

[Anubistraveler]

I don't believe the ratings had anything to do with the cancellation. If you examine the ratings for SGA and BSG they are pretty close to SG1. The biggest problem is the cost of the show.

As shows like SG1 go on and on they get more expensive. You not only have to pay the actors more and more but the writers, producers....everyone. Add the effects budget on top of that and you have a very expensive show. This is sadly going to be the hardest hurdle for the studio (MGM) finding a new home for it. No one wants an uber-expensive, mediorically rated (neisons) show...

SciFi channels has a pretty limited budget (where TV goes) and I'm sure they feel that by killing the show they are freeing oodles upon oodles of cash (and lets be honest, they will).

A contributing factor is the grossly broken neilson system which is in DIRE DIRE DIRE need of an overhaul.

IMHO, fans are best left to hope for a movie. Lets just pray it's not done by Devlin *shivers*

Agreed...the ratings system should be based on all people and what they watch not the few....kinda like the electorial college.

[prion]

Relevant excerpts:

http://www.multichannel.com/article/...=Breaking+News

8/23/2006 6:07:00 PM

Ratings for the show -- the 200th episode of which premiered Aug. 18 -- have been declining this season, but Mark Stern, executive vice president of original programming for Sci Fi, said creative and economic decisions also came into play.

Stern added that under terms of its contract, the network’s decision to cancel the series prohibits MGM from making any new episodes of the show to air on U.S. television.

He noted, “If MGM came to us for less,” Sci Fi would be interested in more Stargate SG-1 fare, whether in the form of episodes, movies or miniseries. He would not disclose the network’s license fee to MGM.

Currently in the midst of the first half of its 10th season, Stargate SG-1 will complete its original run on Sci Fi next year, when the service plans to run the final 10 installments of this season. Stern said encore episodes of Stargate SG-1 will also continue to air on the network past the conclusion of its 10th campaign.

[wasp2020]

Well that's mighty interesting.

[Ace]

Well that's mighty interesting.

Indeed... I'm trying to figure out what that legally means the producers can or can not do with the franchise!

Ace

[siXbrownSnakes2]

I thought they no longer had a 'contract' for SG-1 and that was the whole point of this... or am I wrong?

[Arative]

Relevant excerpts:

http://www.multichannel.com/article/...=Breaking+News

8/23/2006 6:07:00 PM

Ratings for the show -- the 200th episode of which premiered Aug. 18 -- have been declining this season, but Mark Stern, executive vice president of original programming for Sci Fi, said creative and economic decisions also came into play.

Stern added that under terms of its contract, the network’s decision to cancel the series prohibits MGM from making any new episodes of the show to air on U.S. television.

He noted, “If MGM came to us for less,” Sci Fi would be interested in more Stargate SG-1 fare, whether in the form of episodes, movies or miniseries. He would not disclose the network’s license fee to MGM.

Currently in the midst of the first half of its 10th season, Stargate SG-1 will complete its original run on Sci Fi next year, when the service plans to run the final 10 installments of this season. Stern said encore episodes of Stargate SG-1 will also continue to air on the network past the conclusion of its 10th campaign.

Well that effectively kills the idea of moving SG-1 to another US network. Sci-fi got the honor of the longest running sci-fi series in US history and made sure that no other network can claim that title with SG-1. Of course the article didn't mention the idea of selling first run overseas and selling to us in the US on itunes or renaming SG-1 and calling it something else.

[Rkp]

Those contracts really screw things up when it matters. I say we boycott SciFi if they will not at least allow MGM to 'try' to make more episodes on a different channel. They dont like the ratings of Stargate, but im sure its better then a lot of other crap they have on their channel. I hope SciFi continues to work in the right direction with MGM and Stargate SG-1. They should consider themselves lucky, they are hosting the longest running scifi show ever! MGM could pick almost any other decent station, hell not even cable, and go in HD as well. Either way, Cooper knows what to do

[Livi2Jack]

That was as cogent and well articulated a post as I have ever read. Kudos.

[Livi2Jack]

This thread is moving a little too fast for my aging brain so this is going to be pretty disconnected, but few random thoughts on the cancellation...

The fact that SciFi are not renewing SG-1 after 10 years is not surprising, but the manner of their non-renewal throws up some interesting issues:

SciFi claim that the decision is not ratings-driven. On one level that seems to be true - the press is reporting pressure from the parent company NBC for a change in poicy which works against shows produced by outside companies, so SG-1 was clearly in the firing line. And the fact the decision was made before ratings for 200 came in suggests it was a done deal. On the other hand, if SG-1's ratings had been higher, SciFi would have looked exceedingly dumb to cancel so early in the season. Rumors reported in the Multichannel article seem to confirm that TPTB at Bridge feel something that many of us have been saying since the beginning of s.10 - that there was a problem with the promotion of the show.

I said in a post ages ago that it seemed wrong to focus ALL the promotion on 200 and not try to promote the episodes which were actually airing each week, and yet that was exactly what happened. It also seemed odd that SciFi completely abandoned the 8pm slot, scheduling repeat shows which were guaranteed to give SG-1 a weak lead-in. This weak promotion may make sense if you consider that SciFi intended to cancel SG-1 all along, and were prepared to take a short term ratings hit in order to justify doing so. One thing that SciFi emphatically do not want - to release a strong SG-1 onto the market where it can be snapped up by a competitor.

The same goes for the recent statement from Stern saying SciFi "is planning" to transfer characters from SG-1 to SGA. For starters, that's not a decision for SciFi, but for MGM and Bridge. SciFi have an ulterior motive here - transferring popular characters from SG-1 MAY strengthen SGA (it's debateable) but will certainly weaken any prospects for SG-1's future survival. SciFi does not want SG-1 to survive and thrive on another network.

It's seems clear that SciFi jumped the gun on the announcement. This is not a friendly divorce by mutual consent. The statements from MGM and RCC suggest they knew that SciFi did not intend to renew and were making contingency plans but they were caught by surprise when SciFi went public: they didn't have any prepared statements and initially were not responding to e-mails from the press. The Multichannel article is hinting at bad feeling and mutterings at Bridge that they feel SciFi has shafted them. Normally, I wouldn't think much of that - TV is a brutal business etc. But when you've got a show that has lasted 10 years, it would have been better to bring it to a triumphant conclusion at a time that all the parties could agree (at least in public!). And with SGA continuing on SciFi, bad feeling between the partners is undesirable. SciFi either displayed extraordinary PR incompetence (I'm sure Scapers will agree that's not beyond the bounds of possibility!) or they've got another agenda - possibly weakening a show which is about to become The Competition?

One thing's for sure - if SGA continues on SciFi, the show is not going to be in an enviable position. It's likely to be the orphan child amongst SciFi's own original programming, with probably even less promotion than now. They won't have SG-1 as a lead-in or the wider benefits of co-promotion, and SciFi's only vested interest will be doing as little as possible to help. It's possible that MGM/Bridge and SciFi will kiss and make up, or at least agree to behave like responsible adults for the benefit of the child, but I'm wondering if SciFi actually have the rights to SGA season 4 tied up - because from MGM's point of view, if they can find a home for SG-1, they might see some advantage in taking custody of SGA as well and selling the show as a pair.

For SG-1 fans, all this is probably very frustrating (unless, like me, you're interested in the behind-the-scenes politics of production, in which case you're in for interesting times). But one of the realities of fandom is that eventually your show will die, and that even before that time, there may be critical health scares. Scapers and Browncoats know the feeling well, as do Doctor Who fans and Blakes 7 fans. it's hard to argue that after 10 years, the death of SG-1 would be premature. But I think the changes to the show gave it new impetus and energy, and there are still plenty of stories to be told - even after 10 years, I would be left with a sense of unfinished business if SG-1 closed.

My advice (for what it's worth) to those of you upset by this news - don't let this spoil your enjoyment of the remaining episodes of season 10. Keep watching, speculating, thunking, analysing, and enjoying each others company in the forums. If it's over, it's over when the last episode airs, not before (and sometimes not even then!). And remember one thing that Stargate has always had - the theme of Hope against the odds.

That was as cogent and well articulated a post as I have ever read. Kudos

[Erik Pasternak]

Relevant excerpts:

http://www.multichannel.com/article/...=Breaking+News

8/23/2006 6:07:00 PM

Ratings for the show -- the 200th episode of which premiered Aug. 18 -- have been declining this season, but Mark Stern, executive vice president of original programming for Sci Fi, said creative and economic decisions also came into play.

Stern added that under terms of its contract, the network’s decision to cancel the series prohibits MGM from making any new episodes of the show to air on U.S. television.

He noted, “If MGM came to us for less,” Sci Fi would be interested in more Stargate SG-1 fare, whether in the form of episodes, movies or miniseries. He would not disclose the network’s license fee to MGM.

Currently in the midst of the first half of its 10th season, Stargate SG-1 will complete its original run on Sci Fi next year, when the service plans to run the final 10 installments of this season. Stern said encore episodes of Stargate SG-1 will also continue to air on the network past the conclusion of its 10th campaign.

I don't know about anyone else, but to me this simply means that they need to "create" Stargate SG-1A to continue. Technically not the same show, but same characters and storyline, potentially.

[Peta919]

to me this simply means that they need to "create" Stargate SG-1A to continue.

It might be a few seasons late, but how about Stargate Command? That name always had a good ring to it, and we know the producers already like it too.

[wasp2020]

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. 'Stargate Command', as the above user said, seems like an inevitable. But who knows what other things are in that contract of theirs.

[macktheknife]

Stern added that under terms of its contract, the network’s decision to cancel the series prohibits MGM from making any new episodes of the show to air on U.S. television.

He noted, “If MGM came to us for less,” Sci Fi would be interested in more Stargate SG-1 fare, whether in the form of episodes, movies or miniseries. He would not disclose the network’s license fee to MGM.

So they rename it Stargate Command, and the courts would need to sort it out if push came to shove.

Sci-Fi's actions essentially seem to be "Well, we don't want to make new episodes, but we want to keep milking the fanbase for all we can", the "encore" episodes, the "moving sg1 cast to atlantis" all smacks of trying to transfer from 1 show to another. If they want it that much, KEEP THE DAMN SHOW.

He also appears to be trying to divert attention from sci-fi, and attempting to "put the ball in mgms court", by saying it's not Sci-Fi that's stopping new episodes, it's that moneygrubbing MGM.

Pathetic and obvious spin.