Did Syfy "damage" SGU's chances of success??

[hercthx]

wow alot of really great points here. if I may add my 2 bits, in retrospect, to me, it seems the way the crossover from sga to sgu was done really did some damage especially in the established veiwership. it was too sudden, and too drastic a change. one thing viewers seem to like is continuity and the way stargate was changed lacked that. the change from sga to sgu was night and day.

to use the way the franchise progress from sg1 to sga as an example, both shows overlapped giving the viewership time to aclimate to the new show. now had sgu been more of the same from sga i think the sudden change would have been ok, but to bring a completely new style of show to the table really needed some overlap time, had we been fead the sgu character development during a final sga season then the transition would have mabey felt a bit more natural. combine this change with the overall syfy content change and well here we are!
if it was just stargate, or just bsg, or just v that hit the sour note i would be more enclined to lay more of the upset with the show, however it was not just one show that hit us with drama, but several, which makes me think that the change was a request from syfy to the shows saying we want to hit more of thgis type of style, and the shows gave them that. now the other side of that is that the shows could have disagreed, and fought to keep the styles that were working for them. bsg/caprica could have stuck with the battle story, stargate could have stuck with the actione adventure story, and v could have stuck with the survival story, but for all these shows to shift gears like they did tells me it was more then just the writers and powers that be. especially at a time when the station was changing it mission statement. even with being human.. more character drama.

[xxxevilgrinxxx]

simply - yes

[Briangate78]

Ok
Keep it nice and discuss the points not the poster.

Personally, I feel they did all they could, yet I know that point is in dispute by some.
Just some of my own observations about this.

Being a more expensive show, Syfy may well have had to put it on in the winter(?) in order to have a better chance of a larger audience and to potentially make more off the adverts.

Friday night was the traditional "stargate" night, yet it still lost ratings relatively quickly in that timeslot. At that point they either had the option to keep it there, or move it to another night with even greater potential for profit or a greater *potential* pool of viewers.

Advertising, well, not being in the US, I'll let you guys "shoot that one out"

So, bearing in mind that NO company makes a product to loose money, what did or didn't Syfy do and what could it have done better?

I agree they did all they could. SGU was just not getting the audience. The show is to blame not the network. The DVR numbers and DVD sales would be much better if it was a timeslot issue. Also, what about the ratings in other countries, they have fallen by a significant amount prettty much everywhere. So that just leads to more evidence that it was the show.

[bluealien]

No..

[chrono trigger]

I agree they did all they could. SGU was just not getting the audience. The show is to blame not the network. The DVR numbers and DVD sales would be much better if it was a timeslot issue. Also, what about the ratings in other countries, they have fallen by a significant amount prettty much everywhere. So that just leads to more evidence that it was the show.

agreed but some will always blame syfy for having the nerve to cancel a show most people dont like

[YoshiKart64]

I agree they did all they could. SGU was just not getting the audience. The show is to blame not the network. The DVR numbers and DVD sales would be much better if it was a timeslot issue. Also, what about the ratings in other countries, they have fallen by a significant amount prettty much everywhere. So that just leads to more evidence that it was the show.

I think the show was a terrible fit for the typical audience of Syfy. The network is full of casual programs and then the few dramas thrown out there fail to gain traction.

The only blame you can throw on Syfy is that they rebranded as a 'casual leaning network with sci-fi elements' whilst also launching harder dramas. It's not really a sci-fi destination anymore.

But to be honest it's easy to blame them for timeslots in retrospect, but anyone who thinks they didn't try and save the show has their head stuck in the sand.

[carmencatalina]

I think the show was a terrible fit for the typical audience of Syfy. The network is full of casual programs and then the few dramas thrown out there fail to gain traction.

The only blame you can throw on Syfy is that they rebranded as a 'casual leaning network with sci-fi elements' whilst also launching harder dramas. It's not really a sci-fi destination anymore.

But to be honest it's easy to blame them for timeslots in retrospect, but anyone who thinks they didn't try and save the show has their head stuck in the sand.

I agree with you, YoshiKart64. I can complain and moan about how Syfy isn't the SciFi channel of yore, but that is neither here nor there. If the show had gotten good ratings, it would have been renewed.

Personally, because I think it is a really good show (translation: I like it!), all I can say is that the average viewing audience of Syfy just doesn't like what I like. Again, personally, I think I have great taste, and the average viewer has crappy taste. But they can say the same about me.

Could Syfy have done more to support the show? Probably yes, for one thing, their promos were never as good as the Space promos for the same episodes, so that's one place I think they didn't do a good job in.

But I honestly think the move to Tuesday was an attempt to get the ratings up. Sure, it didn't work, but at the time I think it seemed like a perfectly good try.

Will I be watching Syfy much, now that it doesn't have any shows I like? Well, no. But that doesn't mean they won't have a show I like again in the future.

[Briangate78]

I think the show was a terrible fit for the typical audience of Syfy. The network is full of casual programs and then the few dramas thrown out there fail to gain traction.

The only blame you can throw on Syfy is that they rebranded as a 'casual leaning network with sci-fi elements' whilst also launching harder dramas. It's not really a sci-fi destination anymore.

But to be honest it's easy to blame them for timeslots in retrospect, but anyone who thinks they didn't try and save the show has their head stuck in the sand.

I agree. Do people really think that Syfy wanted SGU to fail? They lost money on it. When you have shows like W13 and Eureka doing so well, it goes to show what kind of programming is doing well on Syfy. For those Anti-reality folks, the reality shows are not exactly lighting up the ratings either.

There are 4 dramas that will be airing this summer, I expect numbers north of 1.5 Million for each show.

[YoshiKart64]

I agree. Do people really think that Syfy wanted SGU to fail? They lost money on it. When you have shows like W13 and Eureka doing so well, it goes to show what kind of programming is doing well on Syfy. For those Anti-reality folks, the reality shows are not exactly lighting up the ratings either.

There are 4 dramas that will be airing this summer, I expect numbers north of 1.5 Million for each show.

I'd also expect said dramas to be much lighter in tone. If you look at what works on Syfy it's those lighter, more family friendly programs not heavy (as in tone, not commenting on quality here) dramas.

More importantly though its easy to criticize now the situation has played out. When Syfy (and even MGM) were making these decisions they didn't have any of the information we have now.
Even right back to the start it's clear they thought the rebranding would bring in drama fans as well as those already watching - it didn't work out like that. We can all moan and play the blame game but at the end of the day they are just trying to make the best decisions at the time. That goes right up to changing timeslots - no network would try and kill a show just starting its second season.

[Gatefan1976]

I'd say potentially 10% of 3 million is pretty good. And when you factor in the less competitive Friday slot, I think the change (or non change as the case would be) could have been quite significant.

Well, if you added 300k to SGU's current ratings, it would be a significant boost to be sure, but would it be enough to "save" it? I don't know. I think if it was hitting 1.5m constantly, then it would have got a renewal. I don't know if at that point (1.5m) it would be making money, but I think enough people at Syfy would argue it would have been better to take a small loss (if indeed it would have been a loss) in order to keep Stargate on the air.

I do yes. Potentially a huge one. When people are expecting an action adventure and get a character drama instead, I think the only people you hold on to in the long run are those that like both. As those that only wanted an action adventure are disappointed and leave, and those that only wanted a character drama didn't tune in in the first place.

I can buy that, but would the difference have been for better or worse? An interesting question in of itself. Was BH marketed as a "character drama" and would it's numbers have been good enough to score SGU a S2 or 3 renewal at all? BH is still slightly behind the Syfy average IIRC, but from all reports, it's probably not as expensive for Syfy to make/support so it may be a wash.

I agree. I'd have named it Destiny instead to further avoid the stigma, but I don't suppose that was up to Syfy so I didn't mention it.

I think it's presicely due to Syfy not having control over this that it should be mentioned, particulary when we bring advertising into the equation. MGM sold a product to Syfy that emblazoned across the pack was "Contains Stargate", which may not have left Syfy alot of wiggle room to advertise it. I know I'm not explaining myself well on this point, but if someone else "gets" what I'm saying, perhaps they can explain it better.

Certainly they wanted it to succeed when it launched, whether they wanted to risk a third season of a show with falling ratings after they'd seen the first season's run is debatable. When I say they *might* have tried to kill it, I was meaning more with the move to Tuesday than anything else. But like I said, I'm not really arguing that this was the case, I'm only throwing it out there. It's all just speculation.

I understand what you are saying here KEK, cut your losses and run, but for a company to consider that option, they had to have been getting burnt in the first place yeah?

[Tanith0709]

I think it's precisely due to Syfy not having control over this that it should be mentioned, particularly when we bring advertising into the equation. MGM sold a product to Syfy that emblazoned across the pack was "Contains Stargate", which may not have left Syfy a lot of wiggle room to advertise it.

Though MGM would have pitched the series to Syfy and they would have looked into what the show was all about before agreeing to a deal (They're a businesses, think its been gotten across before that they don't do things based on loyalty). They should of known that they were trying to bring in a different kind of audience and thus advertise it accordingly.

Though it is just speculation on whether or not it would of made much of a difference.

p.s. Starting to get annoyed that it has been silent on the MGM front. Would love to get some information from their side of things.

[Gatefan1976]

Though MGM would have pitched the series to Syfy and they would have looked into what the show was all about before agreeing to a deal (They're a businesses, think its been gotten across before that they don't do things based on loyalty). They should of known that they were trying to bring in a different kind of audience and thus advertise it accordingly.

Though it is just speculation on whether or not it would of made much of a difference.

Sure it's speculation, we're just "spitballing" here, I don't think there are many "indesputable facts" to be had in this thread .

Well, were they (MGM) really trying to bring in a different audience? If they were, should they have called it "Stargate" anything? I'm sure Syfy did thier homework as well as they could in knowing what to expect, but all they would have had to work with was what MGM chose to tell them until scriptwriting began in earnest, by which time, it's already a little late don't you think?

As to businesses not doing anything on loyalty, sure I agree, they don't, they do however choose to loose money on occasion if there are other benefits to be had (usually traffic).

[Gatefan1976]

p.s. Starting to get annoyed that it has been silent on the MGM front. Would love to get some information from their side of things.

I think MGM is in the ineviable position of having to re-evaluate the value of the SG franchise right now

[Tanith0709]

Well, were they (MGM) really trying to bring in a different audience? If they were, should they have called it "Stargate" anything?

Think the plan was to open up the franchise to a new audience as well as keeping most of the old one, though that didn't exactly work out. Can remember shortly after SGU was announced that they tried to get across a lot that it would be different, which ironically worried me until I seen the comic con trailer for it.

Looking back now I think it probably would have had a better chance without having the "Stargate" in the title (Since there is an expectation that comes with the name). Might have came across better as being advertised as being made from 'the creators of Stargate SG1 & Atlantis' even though it's set in the same universe (ala Dr Who & Torchwood).

I'm sure Syfy did thier homework as well as they could in knowing what to expect, but all they would have had to work with was what MGM chose to tell them until scriptwriting began in earnest, by which time, it's already a little late don't you think?

True, but with regards to advertising in their trailers they use clips from various episodes. I'd assume that someone at Syfy would have watched those episodes, should have known what to expect and so what to get across. Some trailers that were made for episodes were a little misleading.

I think MGM is in the ineviable position of having to re-evaluate the value of the SG franchise right now

Just find it curious as to why there hasn't been a single announcement from them since SGU's cancellation. They haven't even officially acknowledged it.

[Kanten]

There are 4 dramas that will be airing this summer, I expect numbers north of 1.5 Million for each show.

Well...yeah, there isn't anything else on during the summer.