Jay Leno is killing NBC [Text View] - Page 3

marksman

01-10-2010, 05:36 PM

I actually think Conan would be better off being on a new network where he could essentially mold his show.

I think moving into the Tonight Show spot he had all kinds of boundaries both real and perceived and expectations, both real and perceived, of what the show should be.

If he went somewhere else, I think he would likely shift back to a different place.

To be honest though, I have not watched much of him on the TS. I like Conan and Jimmy Kimmel a lot, but I just can't find the time to ever watch them. I would have season passes scrolling off all the time. Eventually I canned Conan, and now I am about to jettison Jimmy, just because I never watch them.

I am really shocked about NBC dropping Leno. :) I am also really shocked that they would potentially use the hiatus of the Olympics to start getting things done. Who would have ever thunk it.

I think someone on these forums might have even suggested Leno was done with the olympics a little while back.

I still don't understand why people who do this stuff for a living missed fundamental issues that most lay people knew would be a problem. I assume the affiliates said, "We are going to run reruns of CSI Miami to build a bigger lead in for our Nightly News".

marksman

01-10-2010, 05:42 PM

Perhaps even deliberately at the expense of its OTA network. Who knows?

It could have been. Certainly seems like some of the shows on USA for example could have potentially done well on NBC.

One of the advantage the cable networks have though, and one thing USA is very good at, for example, is beating shows into the ground. When Burn Notice first came on, they would run a new episode like 30 times a week. It was after being exposed to the first 3 episodes like 5 times one weekend on a trip in a hotel room where I became a fan of the show.

The problem is the networks don't really have that luxury. Unless they eventually give up the affiliate set up and become cable only networks. I think that might have been part of NBC's overall strategy with the Leno move.

They were doing well on their cable channels with a certain style that they could not duplicate on NBC. So they decided to try and take NBC in a totally different direction because of the limitations they had in place.

And that still may be the right answer for them ultimately. This try just wasn't it.

TheMerk

01-10-2010, 05:45 PM

I assume the affiliates said, "We are going to run reruns of CSI Miami to build a bigger lead in for our Nightly News".

I know first hand of a top 40 affiliate that told NBC they would simply start their local news at 10pm, and either run it clear through until 11:35, or do news from 10-11 and an extended sports news segment from 11-11:35.

Adam1115

01-10-2010, 05:46 PM

So what happens to Jay's ratings if Conan goes against him at the same time? That can't be good...

Amnesia

01-10-2010, 06:00 PM

So what happens to Jay's ratings if Conan goes against him at the same time? That can't be good...Having Conan against him didn't seem to bother Dave---why should it bother Jay when head-to-head, Jay beat out Dave on a regular basis?

I would think Conan would steal more viewers from Letterman than Leno...

mrdbdigital

01-10-2010, 07:09 PM

Replacement programming for 10 PM spot at NBC: Law & Order: SRU (Special Ratings Unit) :)

Adam1115

01-10-2010, 07:17 PM

Having Conan against him didn't seem to bother Dave---why should it bother Jay when head-to-head, Jay beat out Dave on a regular basis?

I would think Conan would steal more viewers from Letterman than Leno...

Well increasing the competition from 2 shows to 3 is bound to affect ratings......

Rob Helmerichs

01-10-2010, 07:21 PM

Replacement programming for 10 PM spot at NBC: Law & Order: SRU (Special Ratings Unit) :)
They could always move L&O:CI back to NBC, although if they've been paying the talent cable rates, it'll end up costing them a lot more...

JYoung

01-10-2010, 07:29 PM

The two options on the table are:

1) Jay Show 11:35; Tonight/Conan 12:05; Fallon 1:05
or
2) Conan leaves; Tonight/Leno 11:35; Fallon 12:35

Can't they just get rid of Fallon and plug Carson Daly in?

Well increasing the competition from 2 shows to 3 is bound to affect ratings......

I suspect that those watching Leno will stick with Leno (except those few that won't stay up). Most of those watching O'Brien will probably jump to his show. The issue would be those that are watching both shows which I suspect is a small amount.

Adam1115

01-10-2010, 07:47 PM

I suspect that those watching Leno will stick with Leno (except those few that won't stay up). Most of those watching O'Brien will probably jump to his show. The issue would be those that are watching both shows which I suspect is a small amount.

Presumably they're hoping to get the ratings back to the way they were. I assume, since Leno's ratings suck now, that he lost viewers to Conan. If he only keeps his current viewers, moving it back to the old time won't help...

JYoung

01-10-2010, 08:07 PM

Presumably they're hoping to get the ratings back to the way they were. I assume, since Leno's ratings suck now, that he lost viewers to Conan. If he only keeps his current viewers, moving it back to the old time won't help...

Leno's getting the same numbers at 10 PM that he did at 11:30 PM.
Of course, the numbers aren't very good for 10 PM.

O'Brien was the one who bled viewers from the 11:30 slot.

aaronwt

01-10-2010, 08:23 PM

aindik

01-10-2010, 08:27 PM

Without affiliates to air their shows there would be no network. There is a reason they gave into the affiliates. You're the one not getting it.

One affiliate threatens, no biggie. 20,30,40 in major markets complain. You get their attention.

Of course "without affiliates" there is no network. But the choice isn't between affiliates that are always happy, and no affiliates at all. There's a huge middle that you're ignoring.

Just like the choice isn't between gangbuster ratings and "no viewers." There's a huge in between.

BTW, "the network" and "the affiliates" are one and the same in these 10 cities:
NBC New York (WNBC)
NBC Los Angeles (KNBC)
NBC Chicago (WMAQ)
NBC Philadelphia (WCAU)
NBC Bay Area (KNTV)
NBC Dallas/Fort Worth (KXAS)
NBC Washington (WRC)
NBC Miami (WTVJ)
NBC San Diego (KNSD)
NBC Connecticut (WVIT)

Rob Helmerichs

01-10-2010, 08:31 PM

Leno's getting the same numbers at 10 PM that he did at 11:30 PM.
Of course, the numbers aren't very good for 10 PM.
Although NBC was still making money off the deal (since the cost of the Leno show is so much less than an hour of scripted drama, or even reality television). It was the affiliates who were suffering (losing as much as half their news audience, which is where they make much of their money), and apparently they were the ones who forced this move.

smak

01-10-2010, 08:52 PM

Of course "without affiliates" there is no network. But the choice isn't between affiliates that are always happy, and no affiliates at all. There's a huge middle that you're ignoring.

Just like the choice isn't between gangbuster ratings and "no viewers." There's a huge in between.

BTW, "the network" and "the affiliates" are one and the same in these 10 cities:
NBC New York (WNBC)
NBC Los Angeles (KNBC)
NBC Chicago (WMAQ)
NBC Philadelphia (WCAU)
NBC Bay Area (KNTV)
NBC Dallas/Fort Worth (KXAS)
NBC Washington (WRC)
NBC Miami (WTVJ)
NBC San Diego (KNSD)
NBC Connecticut (WVIT)

It seems like NBC doesn't think there's a middle either, since they bailed from Leno so quickly, and want to put him after the local news where he can't do as much harm.

Earlier in the thread people were talking about SEASONS for NBC to dump Leno at 10pm, and now he's gone after 4 months.

-smak-

smak

01-10-2010, 08:53 PM

You essentially answered your own question.

Station managers? Gosh, talk about "dense". I can see why your perspective is so heavily affiliate-biased -- why you are having such a hard time seeing the network's point-of-view.

If the answer to why it's better for the network to keep Leno on at 10pm is that it's cheaper to air, then why he is gone?

-smak-

aindik

01-10-2010, 09:12 PM

If the answer to why it's better for the network to keep Leno on at 10pm is that it's cheaper to air, then why he is gone?

-smak-

Because the affiliates raised holy hell. The network itself was happy with the difference between network advertising revenue during Leno's show and the amount Leno's show cost to make (as compared to the difference between network advertising revenue during scripted shows and the amount scripted shows cost to make). But the hit on the local side, at 11 p.m., annoyed the affiliates, to the point where they were considering "doing something" about it (e.g., possibly not airing the Leno show and daring NBC to sue them).

What was interesting was that NBC is down 0.9 points in the ratings from last year at 10 p.m., but CBS, ABC, and Fox are down, too (0.1 points each). IOW, the people no longer watching NBC are not going over to the other OTA networks.

netringer

01-10-2010, 09:20 PM

What d'ya think?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/graphic/2010-01/51534084.gif

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-talk-late-night-stockjan10,0,1661780.htmlstory

Craig should be more to Best Show side. Nudge Dave a little more that way, too.

YCantAngieRead

01-10-2010, 09:22 PM

Craig should be more to Best Show side. Nudge Dave a little more that way, too.

That (the Craig part) was my first thought, too. He puts on a fantastic show.

lambertman

01-10-2010, 09:29 PM

Chelsea Handler should be so far to the left that she's off my screen entirely.

5thcrewman

01-10-2010, 09:34 PM

Give Jay a 5 minute show at 11:35pm - like those Wimbledon updates they do.

IndyJones1023

01-10-2010, 09:37 PM

You people have to be kidding about Craig Ferguson. He sucks.

I like him so I tuned in. After a few week, I found him to be INCREDIBLY repetitive. He uses the same joke, and variations on the same, over and over and over and over and over again. It's coma-inducing.

Combined with the fact that he talks over his guest and makes the interview as much about him as about them and he lost me as a viewer.

lambertman

01-10-2010, 09:54 PM

As you said about "Community", it took Craig a while to settle in. His interviewing might still lack, but his monologues are fantastic.

IndyJones1023

01-10-2010, 09:59 PM

I still occasionally watch Craig. His monologues are the same as they ever were. He hasn't settled in. He's still repeating his same old jokes. :down:

aaronwt

01-10-2010, 10:21 PM

YCantAngieRead

01-10-2010, 10:38 PM

I still occasionally watch Craig. His monologues are the same as they ever were. He hasn't settled in. He's still repeating his same old jokes. :down:

Each to his own, I guess. Maybe I don't watch it enough, but I always find his monologues fresh and funny, and his interviews more personable than most.

And I can't stand Leno, but lots of people like him, so I'm willing to concede my taste may not be exactly mainstream.

tem

01-10-2010, 11:00 PM

Leno sucks. Always has. Always will
Craig rulez. Started watching him a lot more in the last 4-6 months (unemployment will do that)
Dave is the King.

So there.

murgatroyd

01-10-2010, 11:01 PM

Each to his own, I guess. Maybe I don't watch it enough, but I always find his monologues fresh and funny, and his interviews more personable than most.

I'm with you, Angie.

You aren't going to see this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bbaRyDLMvA) (or this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzRzmKbffKk)) on The Tonight Show.

Jan

JYoung

01-11-2010, 12:04 AM

Although NBC was still making money off the deal (since the cost of the Leno show is so much less than an hour of scripted drama, or even reality television). It was the affiliates who were suffering (losing as much as half their news audience, which is where they make much of their money), and apparently they were the ones who forced this move.

True.
Everything I've read and seen indicates that while Leno's ratings are lower then they thought they would be, it wasn't in the red since Leno's show is relatively cheap to produce.

What took everyone by surprise though, was the bleeding of viewers from the following news shows and the Tonight Show.
(I'm guessing that The Late Show lost viewers too but I haven't seen anything on Fallon's numbers.)

Einselen

01-11-2010, 12:14 AM

hyimted

01-11-2010, 01:52 AM

obviously, to each their own .... but letterman should be lower-left. i can't stand that guy ... i have no clue how he's been so successful for so long.

DevdogAZ

01-11-2010, 03:53 AM

This proposal of giving Leno a half hour slot at 11:35 seems to be NBC solidifying the failure of The Tonight Show. No live viewer who wants to watch Conan is going to suffer through a half hour of a Jay Leno monologue.
But that's the point. Not enough live viewers are watching Conan right now. I'd be willing to bet that when Leno moves to 11:35, NBC's ratings for that time slot go up almost immediately.
What d'ya think?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/graphic/2010-01/51534084.gif

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-talk-late-night-stockjan10,0,1661780.htmlstory

Craig should be more to Best Show side. Nudge Dave a little more that way, too.
I think it's unfairly critical of Leno, and overrates Letterman, just like every other ranking by TV journalists in this country.

jimborst

01-11-2010, 04:03 AM

I have always been a big Letterman fan, but since my DVR kept cutting the end off I extended the end time and started getting the beginning monologue from Craig Ferguson. I have now set up a whole season pass for his show, I actually think he may be funnier than my hero David Letterman. I think that Dave has gotten too political lately. Craig can be a little childish at times (puppets) but otherwise I am really liking his show.

bicker

01-11-2010, 06:44 AM

Without affiliates to air their shows there would be no network.Most folks complaining about NBC these days express their fear that what you're saying is not true. They're rightfully afraid that OTA television will become a home solely for news, sports, weather, reality shows, game shows and home shopping. You must have missed the memo.

There is a reason they gave into the affiliates. I told you: Public pressure. It has happened before. The New York Times wrote about the original deal between NBC, Leno and O'Brien, in 2004, that, "One of the main inspirations for concluding the deal this early was NBC's conviction that it could not go through the painful and at times embarrassing process that attended the last decision to turn over the host job on 'Tonight.'" The manipulation of public opinion always has impact, in these dealings.

Or does that bit of history go back "before your time"? Gosh you make me feel old.
You're the one not getting it.Bull. See above.

bicker

01-11-2010, 06:46 AM

Public pressure. It has happened before. The New York Times wrote about the original deal between NBC, Leno and O'Brien, in 2004, that, "One of the main inspirations for concluding the deal this early was NBC's conviction that it could not go through the painful and at times embarrassing process that attended the last decision to turn over the host job on 'Tonight.'" The manipulation of public opinion always has impact, in these dealings.
If the answer to why it's better for the network to keep Leno on at 10pm is that it's cheaper to air, then why he is gone?
See above.

bicker

01-11-2010, 06:50 AM

What did Jay do to Conan?Ostensibly, Leno was part of the promise made to O'Brien that he'd "get" the Tonight Show. He can reasonably feel that pulling it from him in less than a year is a stab-in-the-back. It isn't like a scripted drama, where the die is almost always cast after a few episodes.

bicker

01-11-2010, 07:04 AM

It could have been. Certainly seems like some of the shows on USA for example could have potentially done well on NBC.Monk for sure. Burn Notice pretty likely.

One of the advantage the cable networks have though, and one thing USA is very good at, for example, is beating shows into the ground. When Burn Notice first came on, they would run a new episode like 30 times a week. It was after being exposed to the first 3 episodes like 5 times one weekend on a trip in a hotel room where I became a fan of the show.Perhaps the OTA networks need to take a cue from this. They already have, of course, using Saturday nights for rebroadcasting scripted dramas from earlier in the week, but why not go further? Essentially, the networks are programming some time slots as if its do-or-die. Not everyone has four-tuner DVRs. So why not promise to present shows that are in highly-competitive time slots twice a week in prime time, as a matter of course, instead of just scheduling Saturday night seemingly on a whim? I think it is clear that there is still going to be some more loss of hours of scripted drama on OTA networks in the years to come: I would sure prefer that those hours get replaced with reruns of scripted dramas that I had to skip, because they were on up against too many other good scripted dramas, than to have those hours replaced with more news magazines.

The problem is the networks don't really have that luxury. Unless they eventually give up the affiliate set up and become cable only networks.Whoa... roll back. Why not? Sure the network cannot rerun these shows at 2am, but they can, at least, rerun them elsewhere in prime time, like I suggested. Also, I see no reason why the networks cannot allow their affiliates to carry an overnight feed, with more reruns.

Uh-uh... I think that the OTA networks can do many of the things you're claiming that they can't do. They just need to be a little inventive about how to do it.

I think that might have been part of NBC's overall strategy with the Leno move.I wonder if Leno is actually cheaper than having to pay more to rerun scripted dramas more often. Not sure.

They were doing well on their cable channels with a certain style that they could not duplicate on NBC. So they decided to try and take NBC in a totally different direction because of the limitations they had in place. And that still may be the right answer for them ultimately. This try just wasn't it.Well, I don't think you can say that this "wasn't the right ..." "... certain style". Rather, the change was opposed, and the opposition won. That says nothing about whether or not it was the right direction for the network aside from the opposition from the affiliates. It seems clear that a big change coming, a change that a lot of people are going to oppose. There is probably no such thing as a major change that people won't oppose. So in the end, the future will be determined by the first reasonable change (as this one was) for which the opposition falters. It sure seems like a horribly random way to find a way forward, but that's a reflection of the reality of human nature.

bicker

01-11-2010, 07:08 AM

What took everyone by surprise though, was the bleeding of viewers from the following news shows and the Tonight Show.I don't think many people were surprised that they bled viewers -- surely no one in the business was. Perhaps it was a little more loss than anticipated, but it was well-understood, going into this, that the affiliates' late local news was going to bear the brunt of Leno at 10PM. Some affiliates opposed this from the start. (Others kept quite perhaps because they recognized that a suckier situation as an affiliate is still better than not being an affiliate.)

Amnesia

01-11-2010, 07:45 AM

Ostensibly, Leno was part of the promise made to O'Brien that he'd "get" the Tonight Show. He can reasonably feel that pulling it from him in less than a year is a stab-in-the-back. You make it sound like Leno was the one going to NBC and arranging the move back to 11:30. That's not what happened. Leno didn't "pull it from him". NBC pulled it from him.

What did you want Leno to do when NBC came to him with the idea of moving back to late night? Say that he wouldn't do it?

bicker

01-11-2010, 07:55 AM

mrdbdigital

01-11-2010, 10:34 AM

I'm not sure that NBC's affiliates are interested in any additional programming from the network (such as late night reruns). That would cut into their local syndicated and paid programming time, and I'll bet they make more money from local programming than from airing network content, at least in the larger markets.

bicker

01-11-2010, 10:36 AM

So make it optional, like I suggested. They've got o/o in some of the larger markets anyway.

aindik

01-11-2010, 10:40 AM

So make it optional, like I suggested. They've got o/o in some of the larger markets anyway.

If Thursday at 9 is an important time slot, they want to make sure as many people as possible are watching on Thursday at 9. Rerunning the show that's on Thursday at 9 on Saturday at 10, regularly every week, invites people not to watch it on Thursday.

bicker

01-11-2010, 11:04 AM

Perhaps, but then the logical conclusion is that it is utterly unreasonable to expect good television except when loads of people are willing to watch. And that we're essentially on a spiral that will invariably lead to less and less good television.

And I can't say that that's not the case.

JYoung

01-11-2010, 11:28 AM

Leno's ratings were actually above what NBC expected but like others said the shows after had the Leno Effect and affiliates were getting a huge drop off and of course that didn't make the affiliates happy.

I'm not sure I buy that statement.
If that was the case, NBC wouldn't have been saying, "Just wait until Leno's up against reruns. He'll have new content while they'll have old stuff" when talking about Leno's low (for Primetime) ratings.

Einselen

01-11-2010, 11:38 AM

I'm not sure I buy that statement.
If that was the case, NBC wouldn't have been saying, "Just wait until Leno's up against reruns. He'll have new content while they'll have old stuff" when talking about Leno's low (for Primetime) ratings.

Here are some quotes and numbers for you to show the to NBC Leno was "successful" in the ratings.

At a 1.8 rating among the young adult viewers that NBC seeks — a prescription for cancellation for a network drama — Mr. Leno “would be a home run,” said Jeff Zucker, the NBC Universal chief executive who engineered the Leno move.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/business/media/01leno.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

As of Nov he had an average rating of 1.98. Thus by Zucker that is considered a home run.

Overall through 11/1/09: 1.98 adults 18-49 rating, 6.594m avg. viewers

http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/11/04/how-did-nbc-do-at-10pm-weekdays-before-the-jay-leno-show/32641

JYoung

01-11-2010, 11:41 AM

Here are some quotes and numbers for you to show the to NBC Leno was "successful" in the ratings.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/business/media/01leno.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

As of Nov he had an average rating of 1.98. Thus by Zucker that is considered a home run.

http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/11/04/how-did-nbc-do-at-10pm-weekdays-before-the-jay-leno-show/32641

I'm not saying that Zucker didn't say it.
I'm saying that I'm not sure that NBC would really be happy with the 1.8 rating.

DevdogAZ

01-11-2010, 11:44 AM

Hey: I'm just explaining what O'Brien could be thinking. I didn't say I agreed with him. From O'Brien's perspective, when NBC came to Leno saying that the pressure from the affiliates is too intense, Leno could have said, "Well okay: Give me $5M for a non-compete clause, and I'll go away quietly." Now, if I was Leno, I wouldn't do that, but the point is that he could. Instead, Leno and NBC essentially "conspired" (again, I'm describing what is a possible and reasonable perception on the part of O'Brien) to bump him (O'Brien) back out to late-late.
But that's not how it worked. Leno has a two-year on air commitment in his contract. That means that if NBC forces him off the air before the end of two years, they have to pay him a penalty. And I'm guessing that the penalty is in the $25-50 million range, not $5. The same is true of Conan. The rumors are that he has a $40-50 million buyout in his contract if NBC cans him before a certain period.

So NBC is stuck. If they get rid of either one, they have to shell out big bucks. If they get rid of either one, they could potentially face some additional competition from FOX in that late night timeslot. That's why the NBC execs are trying to split the baby by suggesting that Leno move back to 11:35 but only for half an hour. That's their way of trying to salvage the situation rather than paying out a big buyout or having either of them jump to FOX.

Einselen

01-11-2010, 11:48 AM

I'm not saying that Zucker didn't say it.
I'm saying that I'm not sure that NBC would really be happy with the 1.8 rating.

Why not? They were not doing it for huge ratings as the cost of the show was so small. A 1.5 rating would make NBC $300 million. The Tonight show had a rating of 1.3 to 1.5. The rule of thumb is 2.5 for Dramas/Scripted shows to stay on air (again due to cost to produce). A scripted show would cost about $3 million an episode where Leno is about $350,000 to $400,000 an episode saving $13 million a week without NBC having to beat its competitors.

Einselen

01-11-2010, 11:50 AM

But that's not how it worked. Leno has a two-year on air commitment in his contract. That means that if NBC forces him off the air before the end of two years, they have to pay him a penalty. And I'm guessing that the penalty is in the $25-50 million range, not $5. The same is true of Conan. The rumors are that he has a $40-50 million buyout in his contract if NBC cans him before a certain period.

So NBC is stuck. If they get rid of either one, they have to shell out big bucks. If they get rid of either one, they could potentially face some additional competition from FOX in that late night timeslot. That's why the NBC execs are trying to split the baby by suggesting that Leno move back to 11:35 but only for half an hour. That's their way of trying to salvage the situation rather than paying out a big buyout or having either of them jump to FOX.

Also interesting tidbit is Conan's contract has a clause that his show could be pushed back to start at 12:05 and that is mainly for sports runovers but it looks like NBC may be trying to use this as a loophole in Conan's contract.

bicker

01-11-2010, 11:50 AM

Like I said, I don't necessarily agree with the idea that O'Brien has a legitimate beef.

As it is, though, NBC does have a plan forward that satisfies their contractual obligations, with all three (Leno, O'Brien, and Fallon). They're not "stuck". Rather, anyone who doesn't like the plan forward is "stuck".

Test

01-11-2010, 11:53 AM

You make it sound like Leno was the one going to NBC and arranging the move back to 11:30. That's not what happened. Leno didn't "pull it from him". NBC pulled it from him.

What did you want Leno to do when NBC came to him with the idea of moving back to late night? Say that he wouldn't do it?

Before all this came out didn't Leno say this in some interview about the situation? Leno: If NBC was willing to put me back to my old time slot I would be willing to go.
OOOOR something like that?

Couldn't that be taken as Leno fishing for his old job?

Rob Helmerichs

01-11-2010, 01:12 PM

Why not? They were not doing it for huge ratings as the cost of the show was so small. A 1.5 rating would make NBC $300 million. The Tonight show had a rating of 1.3 to 1.5. The rule of thumb is 2.5 for Dramas/Scripted shows to stay on air (again due to cost to produce). A scripted show would cost about $3 million an episode where Leno is about $350,000 to $400,000 an episode saving $13 million a week without NBC having to beat its competitors.
But once again, the problem wasn't with NBC; the problem was with the affiliates. Some local news shows lost half their audience. NBC can't afford to have affiliates going out of business because NBC can't provide prime time network-level eyeballs.

I don't know what their original plan was to not bleed viewers at 10:00 Central, but whatever it was, it failed miserably, and apparently the decision to push Leno out of prime time was the direct result of a threatened affiliate revolt.

morac

01-11-2010, 01:24 PM

According to TMZ (http://www.tmz.com/2010/01/10/conan-obrien-jay-leno-nbc-foc-abc-tonight-show/), Conan has a 5 year $20 million a year contract and that NBC will be in breach of contract if they move The Tonight Show to 12:05 AM. If true, that means Conan will get (at least) $80 million no matter what he does (walks, stays or moves to a different network).

bicker

01-11-2010, 01:43 PM

According to TMZ (http://www.tmz.com/2010/01/10/conan-obrien-jay-leno-nbc-foc-abc-tonight-show/), Conan has a 5 year $20 million a year contract and that NBC will be in breach of contract if they move The Tonight Show to 12:05 AM.I think they're mistaken. FWIR, the breach is if they move Conan past 12:05 am -- not to 12:05 am.

DevdogAZ

01-11-2010, 01:48 PM

I think they're mistaken. FWIR, the breach is if they move Conan past 12:05 am -- not to 12:05 am.
Despite the JFK/Playboy thing a couple weeks ago, I trust TMZ's sources more than I trust the opinions of random people in this thread, so if TMZ is telling us that the 12:05 loophole in Conan's contract doesn't really exist, I'm going to believe them until I hear otherwise.

bicker

01-11-2010, 01:50 PM

You trust TMZ? Ooooooo kay.... <backing away slowly>

netringer

01-11-2010, 01:51 PM

The peacock ruffled Conan O'Brien's feathers -- and now he's ready to fly the coop.

The "Tonight Show" host feels like the redheaded stepchild of late-night TV after NBC's abrupt decision to cancel Jay Leno's 10 p.m. experiment after just five months -- and return the car-loving comic to O'Brien's coveted 11:35 p.m. slot.

"This level of sh- - -iness was not expected," one source said.

"He's done a great job for NBC. He moved his entire staff, he moved his family to LA. And five months later, they repay him like this?"

As it stands now, the source said, "Conan would be happier somewhere else."...

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/just_call_him_conan_flyin_ThND8Mdv5MI5Pv8udof1LJ

What did I tell ya?

Hey, NBC, you get to keep "the old fossil," as Helen Kushnik called Johnny.

DevdogAZ

01-11-2010, 01:53 PM

Before all this came out didn't Leno say this in some interview about the situation? Leno: If NBC was willing to put me back to my old time slot I would be willing to go.
OOOOR something like that?

Couldn't that be taken as Leno fishing for his old job?
Yes, Leno did an interview with Broadcasting & Cable in November and basically said that if NBC asked him to go back to that slot, he would do so. The statement was made in the context of him claiming to be a team player, and that's why he agreed to leave that slot in the first place, why he agreed to the 10pm show, and why he'd go back to 11:35 if that's what they asked him to do. I don't think it was any kind of stab in the back to Conan, since it wasn't really a well-kept secret that Leno never wanted to leave The Tonight Show in the first place.

Those who want to find a reason to blame Leno (there seem to be many of those) will use that comment as some kind of slight against Conan. But the reality is that NBC didn't really treat either of them very well, and Leno has every right to look out for his own career. He shouldn't be expected to ride off into the sunset just because NBC wants him to.

DevdogAZ

01-11-2010, 01:56 PM

You trust TMZ? Ooooooo kay.... <backing away slowly>
I'm not saying they're infallible. I'll gladly change my opinion if I hear something more credible claiming the other is true. But as it stands right now, everything I've seen about the 12:05 loophole is rumor, and now TMZ has people saying it's not true. Based solely on the circumstances, I tend to believe the TMZ sources in this case, because that explanation makes more sense.

bicker

01-11-2010, 01:58 PM

The New York Times is going with this:The network has a plan in the works to restore Jay Leno to his old spot at 11:35 each weeknight for a half-hour, while pushing the man who replaced him, Conan O’Brien, to a starting time of 12:05 a.m. Mr. O’Brien would then have a full hour.

...

The exact terms of Mr. O’Brien’s contract are not known, but he is rumored to have built into the deal he made five years ago to stay at NBC a guarantee that he would host “The Tonight Show” or NBC would owe a penalty of as much as $45 million. If his show continues to be called “The Tonight Show,” NBC may not be in breach of his contract, which could compel Mr. O’Brien to stay at NBC even if another network makes him an offer.I realize who you believe will be a matter of personal preference, but even on matters regarding the entertainment industry, I'll put more stock in the New York Times than in TMZ.

JYoung

01-11-2010, 01:59 PM

Wil

01-11-2010, 02:02 PM

The New York Times is going with this:I realize who[m] you believe will be a matter of personal preference, but even on matters regarding the entertainment industry, I'll put more stock in the New York Times than in TMZ.A little better than nothing is better than nothing, agreed.

bicker

01-11-2010, 02:04 PM

A 3.0 might have gotten them to move Conan into prime time too. :)

aindik

01-11-2010, 02:06 PM

The New York Times is going with this:I realize who you believe will be a matter of personal preference, but even on matters regarding the entertainment industry, I'll put more stock in the New York Times than in TMZ.

I don't think Conan's lawyers would have let pass a contract provision that lets NBC put "The Tonight Show" anywhere they want in the schedule (which is what your quote from CBS says), but you never know.

If they were allowed to put "the Tonight Show" on at 12:35 without triggering a huge payout, why didn't they just do that in the first place once they realized they wanted to keep Leno?

The only reason they moved Leno out of the 11:35 slot in the first place is because they had a contract with Conan that made them do it. Now, we don't know exactly what the contract says, but I can't imagine it would let them air "The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien" at 12:35. Because if it did, that's what they would have done all along.

aindik

01-11-2010, 02:11 PM

In addition to what Rob said, I don't really think NBC wanted to get a 1.8 or less. I think they expected better.
Sure it makes them money, but a 2.5 or a 3.0 would make even more.

Of course it would, but at what cost?

Some math. Let's assume Leno costs $2 million a week to produce. Let's also assume dramas cost $15 million a week to produce. Let's finally assume that NBC would buy 30 weeks of dramas or 48 weeks of Leno. Let's assume these prices include the right to run reruns free.

Leno costs $2 million X 48 = $96 million a year. Dramas cost $15 million X 30 = $450 million a year.

They can afford a lot lower revenues from Leno and still come out way ahead.

bicker

01-11-2010, 02:16 PM

I don't think Conan's lawyers would have let pass a contract provision that lets NBC put "The Tonight Show" anywhere they want in the schedule (which is what your quote from CBS says), but you never know. Well, wait. The New York Times quote does NOT say that NBC is allowed to put the Tonight Show anywhere they want. It doesn't say that they can't, but that is not the same as what you claimed. They specifically are talking about 12:05. I was very deliberate in quoting that earlier portion of the article, so as to not take their later comment out of context.

aindik

01-11-2010, 02:22 PM

Well, wait. The New York Times quote does NOT say that NBC is allowed to put the Tonight Show anywhere they want. It doesn't say that they can't, but that is not the same as what you claimed. They specifically are talking about 12:05. I was very deliberate in quoting that earlier portion of the article, so as to not take their later comment out of context.

Well, without a link I can't evaluate the context. My interpretation of what you posted is that they are talking about the 12:05 thing as a current proposal, not as a term of Conan's contract. The only thing they say about the contract is a that the clause would let them get away with it so long as his show is still called The Tonight Show. It doesn't mention a 12:05 contract term.

bicker

01-11-2010, 02:26 PM

aindik

01-11-2010, 02:44 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/08/business/media/08leno.html

It doesn't mention a 12:05 contract term, specifically, but it mentioned 12:05 and mentions that NBC might not be in breach. Again, that logical implication is more credible to me than anything TMZ says.

TMZ actually cites a source that says prior rumors of the 12:05 loophole are incorrect. The NYT doesn't say anything about a time slot provision. All it says is that if the show's called The Tonight Show, NBC is not in breach. Your inference that the sentence is limited to a 12:05 or earlier start time is an inference. It's not something the NYT says.

Also, the NYT article is from last Thursday, while TMZ's report is from yesterday.

bicker

01-11-2010, 03:00 PM

Time will tell.

sonnik

01-11-2010, 03:45 PM

Hey, NBC, you get to keep "the old fossil," as Helen Kushnik called Johnny.

Ditto. However, I may be one of the few here, but I have the opinion where O'Brien is more like Carson (at least in his style of hosting Tonight). Mainly, I like having Andy on the couch and the "More to Come" bumps that Jay never had.

I wouldn't be shocked if there's some contract discussion over "What is the definition of The Tonight Show?" Meaning Conan's camp could argue that scheduling is a portion of "The Tonight Show". If NBC were to schedule it at 3am, would it still be "The Tonight Show?". Probably not. 30 minutes may seem negligible, but where is the legal threshold?

However, I don't think it would likely come to that - as I think NBC would rather placate Jay and give him the full hour.

NBC is screwed financially either way on Conan's contract (based on what I'm reading); it doesn't sound like they can pay him and force him to sit him on the bench.

JYoung

01-11-2010, 04:37 PM

Of course it would, but at what cost?

Some math. Let's assume Leno costs $2 million a week to produce. Let's also assume dramas cost $15 million a week to produce. Let's finally assume that NBC would buy 30 weeks of dramas or 48 weeks of Leno. Let's assume these prices include the right to run reruns free.

Leno costs $2 million X 48 = $96 million a year. Dramas cost $15 million X 30 = $450 million a year.

They can afford a lot lower revenues from Leno and still come out way ahead.

:confused::confused::confused:
Huh?

I agreed to this.
I just don't think that NBC thought that they'd actually get as low as a 1.8.

I'm reminded of this conversation I saw with a Paramount executive years back when someone asked him why they kept making all those Friday the 13th films.
His response was while the critics pummel them, they're cheap to make and turn a nice profit.
But he was embarrassed to say that.

DeDondeEs

01-11-2010, 04:50 PM

Amnesia

01-11-2010, 04:55 PM

Leno's had his chance, its time for him to move on.You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Tonight Show with Jay Leno regularly trounced Letterman in the ratings, while the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien is a constant runner-up.

Why again is it time for Jay to move on?

vertigo235

01-11-2010, 05:14 PM

the thing is, Jay probably wouldn't have a problem with moving on and competing wth them on another network , NBC is the one that doesn't want this to happen, they are trying to have it all

pcguru83

01-11-2010, 05:32 PM

You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Tonight Show with Jay Leno regularly trounced Letterman in the ratings, while the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien is a constant runner-up.

Why again is it time for Jay to move on?
I still maintain that if Conan wasn't competing with another talk show host on the same network, that his ratings would improve.

DeDondeEs

01-11-2010, 05:36 PM

You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Tonight Show with Jay Leno regularly trounced Letterman in the ratings, while the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien is a constant runner-up.

Why again is it time for Jay to move on?

Because Jay said that he was retiring from the Tonight Show, and Conan was named as the successor... It's Conan's turn.

Its not like Jay created the Tonight show, he was just the next one to carry the torch. He passed the torch onto Conan, now he wants it back?

sonnik

01-11-2010, 05:57 PM

I still maintain that if Conan wasn't competing with another talk show host on the same network, that his ratings would improve.

I agree. If we can agree that Jay is hurting local news, then we can assume that the "wounded" local news doesn't give Conan a good lead in.

There's also a lot of options now, someone who didn't like Conan in 1993 may like him if they were able to give him a second chance. However, the environment doesn't compel them to do so.

trainman

01-11-2010, 06:02 PM

Mainly, I like having Andy on the couch...

It's only been the last few weeks that he's been sitting on the couch for the guest interviews -- and way overdue, in my opinion. (For one thing, it really looked weird when he'd be on the couch for "In the Year 3000" and then go back to the podium for the rest of the show.)

DevdogAZ

01-11-2010, 06:22 PM

The New York Times is going with this:I realize who you believe will be a matter of personal preference, but even on matters regarding the entertainment industry, I'll put more stock in the New York Times than in TMZ.
It's not a question of believing one over the other. The two reports are about totally different things and don't contradict one another. It's entirely possible that the contract language is being interpreted by NBC to mean that they can slap the name "The Tonight Show" on any show at any time and that will satisfy the contract (what the NYT implies) and that there is not a specific contractual clause allowing NBC to start the show anytime between 11:35 and 12:05 (what the TMZ report says).

ElJay

01-11-2010, 06:28 PM

You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Tonight Show with Jay Leno regularly trounced Letterman in the ratings, while the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien is a constant runner-up.

Why again is it time for Jay to move on?

Jay Leno at the Tonight Show wasn't relying on Jay Leno at 10pm to provide a lead-in audience, so it's not a fair comparison. NBC was actually trying to compete in that 10pm time slot when Leno was on the air at 11:35pm. So far we've seen Conan's ratings in the summer and Conan with Leno frightening everybody off at 10pm.

DevdogAZ

01-11-2010, 06:29 PM

DevdogAZ

01-11-2010, 06:38 PM

If I were Conan I would be pretty peeved. He and his staff all uprooted from NY and moved out to LA. Leno's had his chance, its time for him to move on. Unless before this all went down there was some sort of verbal understanding that if Leno's ratings didn't do well that this is what would happen. Although it does not seem like that happened, even though anyone with half a brain would see Leno's show crashing and burning.
Jay has every right to continue working as long as someone will continue paying him to do so. In this case, NBC is paying him a crapload of money to continue working, and they'd have to pay out a big buyout if they kicked Leno to the curb. So let's be serious here. Do you really expect Jay to "move on" when NBC is paying him an 8-figure salary to stay? Would you walk away from that?
Because Jay said that he was retiring from the Tonight Show, and Conan was named as the successor... It's Conan's turn.

Its not like Jay created the Tonight show, he was just the next one to carry the torch. He passed the torch onto Conan, now he wants it back?
Leno was pushed off The Tonight Show. He didn't want to leave. He accepted the 10 pm slot rather than go to another network. Now NBC is trying to fulfill their contractual relationship with Leno, while still appeasing their affiliates. The only way to do that is to put Leno back at 11:35 and hope that Conan accepts the demotion to 12:05 for a couple of years while Leno finishes out his contract.

Let's be objective here. The past is done. The contracts are in place. We can all agree that NBC made mistakes to get to this point. But what do you realistically expect NBC to do now that they're in this situation? As I see it, here are the options:
1. Let Leno go, pay his likely $30-50 million buyout clause, Conan keeps The Tonight Show at 11:35, take the chance that Leno goes to FOX or ABC and competes with The Tonight Show.
2. Let Conan go, pay his reported $40+ million buyout clause, move Leno back to The Tonight Show at 11:35, take the chance that Conan goes to FOX and competes with The Tonight Show.
3. Try to find airtime for both hosts to keep from having to pay a buyout clause and to keep from letting the talent go start a competing show.

None of these options is ideal, and if NBC could go back in time knowing what they know now, they'd make a different decision. But that's in the past and they have to deal with the current situation as it stands. What would you do if you were an NBC exec?

DevdogAZ

01-11-2010, 06:53 PM

And as long as we're playing "What Would You Do?" put yourself in Conan's shoes. NBC has just built a brand new studio and offices for you. You've just moved your entire staff from NYC to LA. You have a contractual guaranty from NBC, so you'll be taken care of financially no matter what you do. But if you decides to leave NBC and go to FOX, it would probably be September before a new show would start, if that soon. Can your staff afford to be unemployed for the next 8 months in LA, hoping that you'll be able to find a place for them all in your new FOX show?

On the flipside, you continue working at NBC. Nothing changes on a day-to-day basis. Everyone keeps their jobs. You stay in the brand new studio. The only difference is that your taped show is now aired 30 minutes later by the network. The network eases the pressure on you to get good ratings, because they know they screwed up the situation and that you're not on a level playing field.

Seems like a pretty easy decision to me.

Amnesia

01-11-2010, 07:07 PM

Because Jay said that he was retiring from the Tonight Show, and Conan was named as the successor... My understanding of the situation was that NBC said that Jay was retiring and Jay simply went along with it. Do you believe otherwise? Do you think it was Jay who went to NBC and said "I'm done with The Tonight Show?"
He passed the torch onto Conan, now he wants it back?Again, he always wanted "the torch". NBC took it from him and gave it to Conan. Now NBC realizes that it was a mistake and NBC is thinking about giving it back to him. Jay's simply a NBC employee---he's said many times that he'll do the show that NBC wants when they want, but that his preference is for late night.

Einselen

01-11-2010, 07:08 PM

But once again, the problem wasn't with NBC; the problem was with the affiliates. Some local news shows lost half their audience. NBC can't afford to have affiliates going out of business because NBC can't provide prime time network-level eyeballs.

I don't know what their original plan was to not bleed viewers at 10:00 Central, but whatever it was, it failed miserably, and apparently the decision to push Leno out of prime time was the direct result of a threatened affiliate revolt.

Oh I know and understand. I am just saying why they probably thought Leno at 1.8 was still a stellar performance. I guess they figured people like "their" news people and will tune back into them even if they were not watching Leno the hour before but it seems they were wrong as Leno was causing a major bleed out effect.

Rob Helmerichs

01-11-2010, 07:19 PM

Oh I know and understand. I am just saying why they probably thought Leno at 1.8 was still a stellar performance. I guess they figured people like "their" news people and will tune back into them even if they were not watching Leno the hour before but it seems they were wrong as Leno was causing a major bleed out effect.
Which surprises me a little bit, but then I'm not a normal person. It would never occur to me to just stay on whatever channel I'm on to watch the news; even in pre-DVR days I would switch to the station whose news shows I liked the most. But apparently there are vast numbers of people who do just watch "whatever's on."

mrdbdigital

01-11-2010, 07:28 PM

Can your staff afford to be unemployed for the next 8 months in LA, hoping that you'll be able to find a place for them all in your new FOX show?

At the network contract level, I would think that if Conan jumps to Fox, his new contract with Fox would take care of his staff during the transition. Conan would probably require that as one of the conditions for him to jump from NBC to Fox. I certainly would.

Didn't Letterman's deal with CBS require that they take care of his NBC staff as well?

bicker

01-11-2010, 07:46 PM

Because Jay said that he was retiring from the Tonight Show, and Conan was named as the successor... It's Conan's turn.You aren't really that naive are you?

USAFSSO

01-11-2010, 08:05 PM

NBC is to Leno as Coke-a-Cola is to New Coke.

DeDondeEs

01-11-2010, 08:28 PM

You aren't really that naive are you?

So NBC wanted to move the lower rated Conan to a better spot to displace the better rated Leno?

Leno just seems like a control freak to me. I remember reading an interview a while back where he said that he would never use guest hosts while he was on vacation, because he didn't want happening to him what he did to Johnny Carson. Leno kept guest hosting the Tonight Show and gradually drove Carson out and taking the spot that Letterman should have gotten.

I think Leno thought that he would do well at the 10pm slot, and he initiated the shuffle and he's blaming management. To think that Leno is "just an NBC employee" and at the whims of NBC management is naive. I think Jay is dumb as a fox.

5thcrewman

01-11-2010, 09:44 PM

Can they still call it 'The Tonight Show' if it starts at 12:05am?

IndyJones1023

01-11-2010, 09:48 PM

Is his show new tonight?

Rob Helmerichs

01-11-2010, 10:19 PM

Is his show new tonight?
Does it matter? :D

IndyJones1023

01-11-2010, 10:25 PM

Well, we're almost half way thru his show (I'm watching from a hotel room), and I've laughed once. At headlines. A joke he didn't even write. Not even a joke, really. And that's the funniest thing on his show.

He's taking lots of pot shots at NBC, though.

IndyJones1023

01-11-2010, 10:27 PM

Wow, Bill Cosby just cut him to the quick.

marksman

01-11-2010, 10:32 PM

If the TMZ report is to be believed, what would happen if Conan jumped ship to FOX and negotiated some kind of deal where FOX only had to pay him $1 million per year for the next 4.5 years. Then NBC would have to pay him $19 million per year during that same time period, and FOX would essentially get to launch a competitive show for relatively little expense.

For some reason I would love to see that happen, regardless of if Conan was successful or not.

But I feel bad thinking to enjoy that, because nobody responsible will ultimately be there and pay the price of the mistakes that caused this all to happen in the first place.

They let Lettermen go for free. They didn't want to repeat that so now Conan may go for 19 million a year? I know I sound like a broken record, but I am so fascinated by this whole thing and how it ever managed to happen.

marksman

01-11-2010, 10:41 PM

If they were allowed to put "the Tonight Show" on at 12:35 without triggering a huge payout, why didn't they just do that in the first place once they realized they wanted to keep Leno?

The only reason they moved Leno out of the 11:35 slot in the first place is because they had a contract with Conan that made them do it. Now, we don't know exactly what the contract says, but I can't imagine it would let them air "The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien" at 12:35. Because if it did, that's what they would have done all along.

I am going to agree with all of this. I doubt many people have seen Conan's actual contract. So all the speculation is probably just that. The handful of people who have seen it, probably are not discussing it outside a small group.

Regardless, we have to remember how this all came about. NBC was so anxious to not lose Conan, that when Conan started seriously grumbling about wanting to have a shot to move up, or he would consider moving out, NBC came up with the idea of giving him the Tonight Show in 5 years. They ran it past Jay, and Jay seemingly shrugged his shoulders and said whatever, probably trying to convince himself he would be done in 5 more years.

However when it got closer, Jay realized there was no chance he would just retire, and NBC started freaking out that Jay would now go somewhere else and compete with them. Their plan all along was to have Conan on the Tonight Show and Jay to essentially retire. I am not sure why they would have thought Jay would ever want to retire, but somehow they managed to convince themselves he would.

So as this whole issue came up, it seems that putting on Leno for 30 minutes first and then having Conan on would have been what they would have done, if it was possible with Conan's contract. I suspect they even talked to Conan about it at the time and he was not interested. So I am guessing based on what we have seen so far, that they probably don't contractually have the room to do this, and it will require Conan's coopoeration to pull off.

Who knows though. Perhaps NBC can throw even more money at Conan and get it to work out.

I think NBC should have realized it probably never made sense to try and keep both of them and went with their best shot. will be interesting to see how it ultimately works out, but it does seem like whomever remains will still potentially have some hard feelings with the network.

marksman

01-11-2010, 10:45 PM

I just read one of those TMZ links and I don't understand the third option they outline in one of them where Conan moves back and re-negotiates for less money.

Why on earth would Conan ever accept that? He can get more money leaving and doing nothing or leaving and doing something else. Why would staying, being moved and taking a pay cut ever be an option for him?

marksman

01-11-2010, 10:52 PM

Either way viewership is declining. in the interview with Jeff Gaspin, he said they gave up nine tenths of a point in the 10PM hour. Where did those viewers go when the other networks also dropped one tenth each in the 10PM hour?

The TV viewing landscape is changing rapidly and the networks have not been able to adjust. Things are probably going to get worse overall for all the networks.

The Cable networks have been doing an awesome job in programming that last hour of primetime. A significant percentage of cable shows are aired in that 10pm/(9pm for us real people) time slot. You can get almost a regularly weekly schedule of different shows every night at that time. They networks have continued to lose massive audiences. When does it stop?

I think the networks have so many disadvantages now that they can't even overcome them and some major things will eventually change. In a few years it will probably not even make any sense for several of the networks to be actual national networks.

marksman

01-12-2010, 12:03 AM

Conan told NBC he wanted to get a shot at the Tonight Show. If he had no chance of doing it, then he was likely going to go look for a deal elsewhere. NBC came up with a stupid plan that they could keep Conan happy by giving him a deal to host the Tonight Show in 5 years. They guessed, incorrectly, that Jay would be happy with retiring then, and they could keep Conan happy as well.

They didn't necessarily want Conan to replace Leno. They just did not want to loose Conan like they lost Letterman. They came up with this silly solution, which they thought would accomplish their goals.

I suspect Leno shrugged his shoulders and agreed with it at the time, being quite non-committal about retiring, but being encouraging enough the NBC execs went ahead with their dumb plan.

5 years later Leno goes, umm yeah, I don't think I really will be retiring, so maybe I could just keep doing the Tonight Show? Too late. NBC already got themselves in a mess with Conan, so then they come up with the deal for Jay at 10.

Jay would have been happy if NBC had left him alone to continue doing the Tonight Show and never doing anything else. All he ever wanted to do was the Tonight Show and he never stopped wanting to do it.

Zevida

01-12-2010, 12:10 AM

appleye1

01-12-2010, 02:23 AM

Nah, probably not. They'd still have treated them like crap, but it's fun to blame everything on Leno.LOL! So true...so true. :)

bicker

01-12-2010, 06:12 AM

It's Conan's turn.You aren't really that naive are you?<total irrelevancy> Uh, could you please try to comprehend messages that you reply to?

Leno just seems like a control freak to me.True or false, that doesn't matter. There is no such thing as "turns" in real life.

I think Leno thought that he would do well at the 10pm slot, and he initiated the shuffle and he's blaming management.Then you simply don't know what you're talking about.

To think that Leno is "just an NBC employee" and at the whims of NBC management is naive.I agree, but I'm very amused that you're making pronouncements about naivete, given your own penchant for it.

I think Jay is dumb as a fox.And now you utterly contradict yourself. Chatting with you feels like chatting with a dart board.

bicker

01-12-2010, 06:19 AM

They came up with this silly solution, which they thought would accomplish their goals.I doubt any other approach would have had any better chance of accomplishing those goals. Short of turning back time and trying something different, there is no way to know whether or not what NBC tried was or was not the best possible approach to the situation. This is perhaps the hardest lesson of life: Sometimes there simply is no perfect answer. Sometimes all there are are a few unknowns to choose from, and the challenge is to guess which one that in the end would turn out to be the least bad.

I suspect Leno shrugged his shoulders and agreed with it at the time, being quite non-committal about retiring, but being encouraging enough the NBC execs went ahead with their dumb plan.I suspect that that is just 20/20 hindsight and your projection of your own personal bias regarding the end-result. It is just as likely that the reality is something quite different; indeed there are a number of different possibilities, all equally-likely, and I would bet that the reality is not nearly so prejudicial against anyone as the vitriol and condemnation that seems to be on everyone's lips these days (for just about everything, not just this).

bicker

01-12-2010, 06:24 AM

This whole thing is just a bummer. If NBC hadn't done this whole Leno experiment, then shows like Southland and Kings might have been given half a chance to develop and stay on the air.Southland, maybe. I'm not convinced that Southland was good enough to warrant even the consideration that TNT gave it. It is "high quality" but the #1 rated show on television is American Idol, so "high quality", in quotation marks like that, is simply not the smartest objective to set for a responsible business.

And Kings -- no way. I liked the show, for reasons that made it utterly inadequate for television.

Nah, probably not. They'd still have treated them like crap, but it's fun to blame everything on Leno.Hehe... yeah, there sure is a lot of that going on... people getting their fun from throwing mud at public figures.

bicker

01-12-2010, 06:58 AM

Westly-C on AVS Forum finally pieced together the entire situation for me, this morning:

The Jay Leno Show has been performing pretty close to expectations, in just about every way. So what's happening is not any type of reflection of failure to achieve objectives. Instead, it has been clear that the show has been canceled due to the bad PR that folks who don't like the idea of Jay Leno at 10PM every night have been able to inspire. The most likely parties were the affiliates -- they have been, as anticipated since the announcement of Jay Leno at 10PM, the most significantly adversely affected, with the ratings for the late local news, in many markets, really being harmed.

What Westly-C pointed out was why it is so important to take this action, to quash this bad PR that people who don't like Jay Leno at 10PM have been able to create: As you probably know, Comcast is in the process of acquiring NBC Universal from GE. The bad PR could be readily turned into political pressure to impose more draconian restrictions on the acquisition than otherwise. That impact would so significant and so long-lasting, that it trumps practically any short-term considerations that would otherwise justify ignoring the bad PR.

Bierboy

01-12-2010, 07:22 AM

All that....plus the fact that the show just sucks....

Rob Helmerichs

01-12-2010, 07:42 AM

Nah, probably not. They'd still have treated them like crap, but it's fun to blame everything on Leno.
I know what you mean. I have a former tenant who is taking me to conciliation court for the return of his security deposit even though he owes more in rent than the amount of the deposit. It made me really mad that he could be so stupid. But when I blamed it on Leno, I felt much better.

Amnesia

01-12-2010, 07:50 AM

All that....plus the fact that the show just sucks....I assume that you were one of the people who didn't like The Tonight Show with Jay Leno? You may not have liked it, but you must admit that it beat the competition...

lambertman

01-12-2010, 07:58 AM

I think it's fair to say that "The Jay Leno Show" is worse than "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno" ever was. The young comedian bits and "10 at 10" are turrbl.

It was a bad formula: five nights a week in prime time with the promise of doing something different, only when you have that much TV to put out there's no time to come up with things that are both different and good. Oh, and fewer celebrity interviews, which is exactly how these shows can do five shows per week to begin with. Even Daily Show has an interview per night with less than half the airtime per week.

And they're built to bleed viewers through the night (monologue, bit, big guest, small guest, musical act, with lots of commercials in the second half)... and you put that in front of your affiliates' cash cow news??

DeDondeEs

01-12-2010, 10:34 AM

Uh, could you please try to comprehend messages that you reply to?

True or false, that doesn't matter. There is no such thing as "turns" in real life.

Then you simply don't know what you're talking about.

I agree, but I'm very amused that you're making pronouncements about naivete, given your own penchant for it.

And now you utterly contradict yourself. Chatting with you feels like chatting with a dart board.

Hey I was wondering who the troll was on the TV Talk board, I think I found him. Or are you Jay Leno? :D

bicker

01-12-2010, 11:03 AM

Seems to me that you're the troll, just replying to messages without any concern about actually understanding what they're saying, first.

DeDondeEs

01-12-2010, 12:15 PM

Seems to me that you're the troll, just replying to messages without any concern about actually understanding what they're saying, first.

I was just simply giving my opinion on what I thought was going on behind the scenes. Yes my opinion was different from the prevailing opinion. But that is what is going on here, people prognosticating about what happened. Unless that is we have NBC executives posting in here?

bicker

01-12-2010, 12:45 PM

I agree that we'd all be better off if either (1) no one prognosticated or projected at all, and instead waiting until reality arrived; or (2) prognostication and projection was fully balanced, with each possibility equally represented.

lew

01-12-2010, 02:08 PM

Of course it would, but at what cost?

Some math. Let's assume Leno costs $2 million a week to produce. Let's also assume dramas cost $15 million a week to produce. Let's finally assume that NBC would buy 30 weeks of dramas or 48 weeks of Leno. Let's assume these prices include the right to run reruns free.

Leno costs $2 million X 48 = $96 million a year. Dramas cost $15 million X 30 = $450 million a year.

They can afford a lot lower revenues from Leno and still come out way ahead.

The alternative to Leno was probably more reality shows, Dateline and game shows.

NBC owed advertisers "give backs" for at least 11 episodes of Leno. Ratings were lower then the guarantee. Kind of like getting a F instead of a D.

Bicker is probably right. Getting approval of the Comcast merger would have made it difficult for NBC to go after affiliates that wanted to drop Leno in favor of local programming. That's probably what motivated NBC to drop Leno next month. Otherwise it would have made sense to keep the Leno show through the summer. That would give NBC more time to come up with programming. I suspect Leno would do (a little) better during the summer against re-runs.

bicker

01-12-2010, 03:11 PM

The alternative to Leno was probably more reality shows, Dateline and game shows.Well, we're going to have the chance to find out, eh? ;)

I'm still holding out for the reverse commute (i.e., a routine rebroadcasting of shows that were first-run on cable).

NBC owed advertisers "give backs" for at least 11 episodes of Leno. Ratings were lower then the guarantee. Kind of like getting a F instead of a D.Actually, it is more like getting a Fail instead of a Pass, but that doesn't support your point as well. ;)

Bicker is probably right. Getting approval of the Comcast merger would have made it difficult for NBC to go after affiliates that wanted to drop Leno in favor of local programming.To be fair, it wasn't my thought... I just recognized how important it was and brought it into this thread.

ewolfr

01-12-2010, 03:22 PM

CoCo doesn't want to follow Leno at 12:05:

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/conan-obrien-says-he-wont-do-tonight-show-following-leno/

Amnesia

01-12-2010, 03:28 PM

Why would he release such a statement to the public while he is (presumably) still in negotiations with NBC?

aindik

01-12-2010, 03:38 PM

Why would he release such a statement to the public while he is (presumably) still in negotiations with NBC?

NBC asked him if he will move to 12:05. Today, he said "no." The idea that him saying "no" is going to stay a secret is ridiculous. So he releases it so his version of "no" gets out before anyone can spin it.

Also interesting that he doesn't take a public position on what his contract does or doesn't require NBC to give him.

ElJay

01-12-2010, 03:44 PM

:up::up: Conan

bicker

01-12-2010, 03:46 PM

Why would he release such a statement to the public while he is (presumably) still in negotiations with NBC?
In the law of remedy, there is a concept called "specific performance", i.e., an order that requires a party to perform a specific act, usually what is stated in a contract. There are a number of conditions where specific performance is precluded. One of those exceptions is when the act is a personal service, such as performing on stage. So they cannot make Conan do the show. All they can do is try to sue him for money damages. I think, at this point, NBC would be better off giving him lots of money to just go away quietly. What we're seeing, here, is "negotiation by media manipulation".

lew

01-12-2010, 04:02 PM

I'm still holding out for the reverse commute (i.e., a routine rebroadcasting of shows that were first-run on cable).

Actually, it is more like getting a Fail instead of a Pass, but that doesn't support your point as well. ;)

To be fair, it wasn't my thought... I just recognized how important it was and brought it into this thread.

What is the budget for shows like White Collar, Leverage and Monk? I wonder if there is a source of lower budget shows. My memory is NBC said no to Monk.I don't remember what kind of ratings NBC got with Merlin (BBC show).

Dexter didn't get great ratings when it was run during the writers strike. I can't see shows first broadcast on basic cable stations getting good ratings. Cable networks rerun the shows multiple times. I don't think there is much of an audience left.

Ratings higher then projected would have allowed NBC to increase the cost of commercials on Leno. My memory is that might be the first few days of the show. I'll give that a grade of A or B. I'd grade ratings slightly above the guarantee a C or D. Everytime the rating was below the guarantee, I'd give the show a F grade.

The number of givebacks suggest the show wasn't even up to the low standards set by NBC.

bicker

01-12-2010, 04:10 PM

What is the budget for shows like White Collar, Leverage and Monk?Lower. I read, all the time, how the cast members on L&O: CI would get a lot more money if the show was moved back to NBC (for example).

Dexter didn't get great ratings when it was run during the writers strike.Dexter needed to be on premium cable, because it relies a bit too much on visceral thrill (read: nudity, excessive gore, etc.) which would not be permitted on broadcast.

I can't see shows first broadcast on basic cable stations getting good ratings.I can. The key is that "good" ratings will be in relation to how much it costs to run reruns, such as in syndication.

Cable networks rerun the shows multiple times. I don't think there is much of an audience left.The folks who rely on OTA. If there aren't that many, then there is no need to present any scripted programming via OTA... just present it all on cable, charge higher subscription fees to pay for them, and be done with it.

The number of givebacks suggest the show wasn't even up to the low standards set by NBC.On the days that they had to give givebacks. It was up to those reasonable standards on the days that they didn't have to give givebacks.

DevdogAZ

01-12-2010, 04:16 PM

There's some good information in this NY Times article regarding Conan's contract and how each side is interpreting it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/business/media/12conan.html

Basically, it's just as I predicted yesterday (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7714719#post7714719). NBC is taking the position that because the show will still be called "The Tonight Show," even at 12:05, that it would not be in breach of the contract, and that there is no specific timeframe spelled out in the contract. Conan's reps are taking the stand that "The Tonight Show" is at 11:35, and bumping it back would no longer be the same show.

An NBC exec claims that Conan's $45 million penalty for not getting to do The Tonight Show is no longer in effect, since Conan was in fact given the opportunity to do the show. He also said that Conan's salary is much closer to $10 million per year than the $20 million previously reported.

FilmCritic3000

01-12-2010, 04:19 PM

Conan Declares War With NBC:

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/conan-obrien-resigning-tonight-show/

Last Thursday, NBC executives told me they intended to move the Tonight Show to 12:05 to accommodate the Jay Leno Show at 11:35. For 60 years the Tonight Show has aired immediately following the late local news. I sincerely believe that delaying the Tonight Show into the next day to accommodate another comedy program will seriously damage what I consider to be the greatest franchise in the history of broadcasting. The Tonight Show at 12:05 simply isn't the Tonight Show. Also, if I accept this move I will be knocking the Late Night show, which I inherited from David Letterman and passed on to Jimmy Fallon, out of its long-held time slot. That would hurt the other NBC franchise that I love, and it would be unfair to Jimmy.

So it has come to this: I cannot express in words how much I enjoy
hosting this program and what an enormous personal disappointment it is for me to consider losing it. My staff and I have worked unbelievably hard and we are very proud of our contribution to the legacy of The Tonight Show. But I cannot participate in what I honestly believe is itdestruction. Some people will make the argument that with DVRs and the Internet a time slot doesn't matter. But with the Tonight Show, I believe nothing could matter more.

FilmCritic3000

01-12-2010, 04:21 PM

bicker

01-12-2010, 04:22 PM

modnar

01-12-2010, 04:22 PM

Good for Conan - both in making this decision and making it public. NBC has been absolutely ridiculous about this since it started back in 2003 or 2004 (or whenever).

DevdogAZ

01-12-2010, 04:25 PM

As posted in the other thread (isn't it about time we merged these?):

There's some good information in this NY Times article regarding Conan's contract and how each side is interpreting it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/business/media/12conan.html

Basically, it's just as I predicted yesterday. NBC is taking the position that because the show will still be called "The Tonight Show," even at 12:05, that it would not be in breach of the contract, and that there is no specific timeframe spelled out in the contract. Conan's reps are taking the stand that "The Tonight Show" is at 11:35, and bumping it back would no longer be the same show.

An NBC exec claims that Conan's $45 million penalty for not getting to do The Tonight Show is no longer in effect, since Conan was in fact given the opportunity to do the show. He also said that Conan's salary is much closer to $10 million per year than the $20 million previously reported.

5thcrewman

01-12-2010, 04:27 PM

CoCo No GoGo to twelve-oh five

5thcrewman

01-12-2010, 04:28 PM

CoCo No GoGo to twelve-oh five

Kamakzie

01-12-2010, 04:41 PM

I'm not a big fan of Conan at all but I commend him on telling NBC to blank off!

DancnDude

01-12-2010, 04:47 PM

I like how Conan ends his letter:
Have a great day and, for the record, I am truly sorry about my hair;
it's always been that way.
:D

sonnik

01-12-2010, 05:07 PM

'Atta boy, Conan.

I posted this elsewhere, but - the last guy who got fed up with NBC's handling of the Tonight Show (and thus left the network) is doing pretty well.

See you on Fox, Conan.

MickeS

01-12-2010, 05:07 PM

I agree completely with Conan.

And NBC is just screwing this up more and more.

DevdogAZ

01-12-2010, 05:13 PM

aindik

01-12-2010, 05:15 PM

DevdogAZ

01-12-2010, 05:21 PM

The one major factor in that decision is, how much severance do they owe each one when they leave.

Let Conan go? Maybe. Let him go AND pay him $45 million? No.
According to the NYT article I linked above, NBC believes that the $45 million clause no longer applies, because Conan was in fact given The Tonight Show as promised. There would certainly be some buyout amount, but I doubt it's nearly that large.

aindik

01-12-2010, 05:28 PM

According to the NYT article I linked above, NBC believes that the $45 million clause no longer applies, because Conan was in fact given The Tonight Show as promised. There would certainly be some buyout amount, but I doubt it's nearly that large.

I'm sure Conan believes differently.

Conan says he won't do "The Tonight Show" at 12:05, because it's not "The Tonight Show" unless it's on right after the late local news. NBC could give Leno back "The Tonight Show" and schedule "The Conan O'Brien Show" at 12:05. They're not suggesting that, and Conan is not agreeing to do that, for some reason. IMO, that reason has to be that there is an interpretation of Conan's contract that subjects NBC to some liability if Conan doesn't get to host The Tonight Show.

ElJay

01-12-2010, 05:31 PM

NBC loves Leno so much, I think he's is going to air at 11:35. Conan will be his competitor starting next fall. NBC offering Leno the 10pm show was a bad enough way to water down "The Tonight Show," now they're offering him 11:35pm as a fallback? That won't help "The Tonight Show." It seems like the ultimate insult and a sign that they don't want Conan anymore. NBC didn't want to choose between Leno or Conan last year but it seems now they're going to have to.

Rob Helmerichs

01-12-2010, 05:37 PM

I'm sure Conan believes differently.

Conan says he won't do "The Tonight Show" at 12:05, because it's not "The Tonight Show" unless it's on right after the late local news.
That's an interesting interpretation, but I have a hard time believing it would hold up in court in a breach-of-contract trial...

Turtleboy

01-12-2010, 05:43 PM

That's an interesting interpretation, but I have a hard time believing it would hold up in court in a breach-of-contract trial...

Does The Tonight Show have to begin Tonight or can it begin tomorrow?

aindik

01-12-2010, 05:47 PM

Does The Tonight Show have to begin Tonight or can it begin tomorrow?

"Late Night" begins in the morning.

And it's still Tonight in the middle of the country. The show would start at 11:05 CT and MT.

As for it holding up in court, I think there's a serious issue about what the meeting of the minds was, if the contract says "the Tonight Show." Could NBC have just slapped "The Tonight Show" name on the 12:35 show Conan was already hosting? Would that have fulfilled NBC's contractual duties?

(Of course, we don't really know what the contract says, so to that extent we're all speculating).

Rob Helmerichs

01-12-2010, 05:49 PM

Does The Tonight Show have to begin Tonight or can it begin tomorrow?
Seems to me that "tonight" lasts all night. "We'll meet tonight at 2:00 AM." It's only "morning" when you're looking back on it ("2:00 AM this morning").

DUDE_NJX

01-12-2010, 05:53 PM

Why won't Leno just f'n retire already?

aindik

01-12-2010, 06:04 PM

I also think Conan and his representatives chose "immediately following the late local news," as their definition, rather than a specific time, to preserve the right to object if NBC decided that the Tonight Show would start at 11:35 as always, but now following the Jay Leno Show at 10:35, which follows the local news, now at 10 instead of 11.

MickeS

01-12-2010, 06:10 PM

Everyone should just have primetime from 7 PM -10 PM like here. The tonight show starts at 10:35 PM here. :)

DevdogAZ

01-12-2010, 06:11 PM

I'm sure Conan believes differently.

Conan says he won't do "The Tonight Show" at 12:05, because it's not "The Tonight Show" unless it's on right after the late local news. NBC could give Leno back "The Tonight Show" and schedule "The Conan O'Brien Show" at 12:05. They're not suggesting that, and Conan is not agreeing to do that, for some reason. IMO, that reason has to be that there is an interpretation of Conan's contract that subjects NBC to some liability if Conan doesn't get to host The Tonight Show.
According to that article that I linked, Conan's contract specifically states that he gets to host "The Tonight Show" but doesn't place any specific time restrictions on when "The Tonight Show" has to air. That's why NBC feels justified in doing what they're proposing.

aindik

01-12-2010, 06:15 PM

According to that article that I linked, Conan's contract specifically states that he gets to host "The Tonight Show" but doesn't place any specific time restrictions on when "The Tonight Show" has to air. That's why NBC feels justified in doing what they're proposing.

The article does say that. I find that surprising.

I'm wondering why they didn't just change the name of "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno" to "The Jay Leno Show," and change "Late Night with Conan O'Brien" to "The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien" last June, and not move anyone's time slot? If their contract allows them to do that, why didn't they?

And why, today, are they proposing a half-hour Leno show instead of an hour?

sonnik

01-12-2010, 06:19 PM

It's only been the last few weeks that he's been sitting on the couch for the guest interviews -- and way overdue, in my opinion. (For one thing, it really looked weird when he'd be on the couch for "In the Year 3000" and then go back to the podium for the rest of the show.)

Agreed. In fact, I recall one of the "Tonight Show" old timers (Newhart, Tony Bennet, or someone like that - I forget who) pointing out that he missed the guy on the couch. I noticed the Andy change shortly thereafter.

Turtleboy

01-12-2010, 06:22 PM

DevdogAZ

01-12-2010, 06:26 PM

The article does say that. I find that surprising.

I'm wondering why they didn't just change the name of "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno" to "The Jay Leno Show," and change "Late Night with Conan O'Brien" to "The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien" last June, and not move anyone's time slot? If their contract allows them to do that, why didn't they?

And why, today, are they proposing a half-hour Leno show instead of an hour?
Just speculation, but I think a year ago, NBC truly believed that Conan would come in and not miss a beat as far as ratings go, and perhaps even improve on Leno's ratings. So they had no incentive to play the semantics games with Conan, and it probably never even occurred to them. Everyone knew that Conan was taking over TTS in 2009, and they lived up to that.

FF to today. Now that both hosts have floundered and NBC is in a tight spot, they are reading the contract more carefully to see what they can get away with. They know that Conan would walk if he had to go back to 12:35, regardless of whether the contract allows it. They don't want to lose Conan, but he's not nearly as valuable as he was a year ago. They know Leno will be a team player if they suggest he shorten his show to 30 minutes. So they propose a "splitting the baby" solution that presents the least problems for NBC.

If Conan plays hardball and walks, it sounds like NBC will take the position that they fulfilled their end of the contract and that he'd be in breach. So what it really boils down to is how much Fox is willing to offer for Conan to move over there, and that will determine how much NBC and Conan will settle for.

aindik

01-12-2010, 06:30 PM

Fox needs to watch out for tortious interference, too.

cmontyburns

01-12-2010, 06:35 PM

That's one hell of a statement that Conan released. Passionate, funny, respectful -- and yet direct, pointed, and stern. Odd though it feels to say, I am proud of him.

smak

01-12-2010, 06:50 PM

I am so in love with Conan right now.

-smak-

aintnosin

01-12-2010, 06:50 PM

I believe that NBC truly believed that Conan would cave and their 11:35/12:05 plan would work out. Now that they're possibly faced with losing Conan, what do you think they should do? If Conan walks, they just reinstally Jay as the host of The Tonight Show, but he's probably only there for another 5-10 years. If they jettison Jay and keep Conan, he's probably there for 15-20 years. Does NBC want to just put this issue to bed right now and not have to revisit it for another decade plus, or do they want to go through another transition in the relatively near future when Jay really is ready to retire?

What NBC should have done is take the Jay Leno Show off the air for "retooling" and take a few weeks to see how The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien would fare without Leno dragging down the affiliates' 11pm rating and competing for guests.

If they go back to the damaged goods that is Jay Leno, he's got a shelf life of five years, maybe ten, and NBC doesn't have a viable replacement if they burn O'Brien. If they let Leno go, he may be a competitor, but it will probably be with a network without a tradition at 11:30. (ABC or Fox) and he's only a problem for a few years. If Conan goes to ABC or Fox, NBC could be faced with finding a replacement for Leno who can compete with a Conan O'Brien who has established a presence at 11:30 and has a 5-year head start.

Magnolia88

01-12-2010, 06:55 PM

I love Conan's statement too.

His people say he was up all night drafting it. I will definitely be watching tonight to see what he says.

The NYT says that the interwebs overwhelmingly support Conan (http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/on-the-web-a-wave-of-support-for-conan-obrien/), which is no surprise. I'm with Coco (http://www.sirmikeofmitchell.com/imwithcoco/). Heh.

aintnosin

01-12-2010, 06:59 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/business/media/12conan.html

NBC wouldn't say that moving O'Brien to 12:05 am isn't a breach of contract (i.e., they wouldn't say anything in regard to that) unless there was a pretty legitimate case to be made that it isn't.
Right, and O.J. Simpson wouldn't say he was innocent unless he really was. Of course, NBC is going to say, publicly, that the law is on their side.

O'Brien's people could make the case that, since The Tonight Show has been aired at 11:30 (or at least after the local news) for about 50 years now, that implies that giving him the show is an implied promise to air the show in the same timeslot it has traditionally occupied.

Hansky

01-12-2010, 07:10 PM

O'Brien's people could make the case that, since The Tonight Show has been aired at 11:30 (or at least after the local news) for about 50 years now, that implies that giving him the show is an implied promise to air the show in the same timeslot it has traditionally occupied.

Multi-million dollar contracts negotiated, no doubt, by many lawyers, don't typically come down to such implications.

Ment

01-12-2010, 07:12 PM

I'm enjoying Leno and Conan eviscerate their network night after night. What other job is there that allow you to throw your boss under the bus like that. Usually I watch only if they have guests that I like. Are the ratings better since this FUBAR?

aindik

01-12-2010, 07:13 PM

Multi-million dollar contracts negotiated, no doubt, by many lawyers, don't typically come down to such implications.

More often than you think. If the contracts were always iron clad and crystal clear, there wouldn't be litigation.

On that subject:
http://thevertexblog.com/cortex/conan-should-blame-his-lawyers-not-nbc

TiVo'Brien

01-12-2010, 07:16 PM

CoCo No GoGo to twelve-oh five

:p :up:

smak

01-12-2010, 07:18 PM

Westly-C on AVS Forum finally pieced together the entire situation for me, this morning:

The Jay Leno Show has been performing pretty close to expectations, in just about every way.

If NBC says that x is the number we need for Leno to be succesful, and Leno hits x, and a lot of affiliates are upset, and think of bailing, then x really wasn't the correct number.

Did they not remember their non o&o affiliates? Did they not remember that the 10pm show is pretty important to the numbers of the 11pm local news?

-smak-

marksman

01-12-2010, 07:19 PM

Westly-C on AVS Forum finally pieced together the entire situation for me, this morning:

The Jay Leno Show has been performing pretty close to expectations, in just about every way. So what's happening is not any type of reflection of failure to achieve objectives. Instead, it has been clear that the show has been canceled due to the bad PR that folks who don't like the idea of Jay Leno at 10PM every night have been able to inspire.

Actually the reality is reasonable people their goals were stupid from the beginning and even if they met their goals they were going to fail.

The problem with affiliates and lead ins was obvious even to a dummy like me. How can people who do this for a living not think that was going to be a problem?

The whole thing was poorly constructed and poorly thought out. Who cares if they met their goals? Their goals still equaled complete failure, which has come to pass.

Has nothing to do with "Bad PR". Has to do with bad results, predicated on decisions that guaranteed you would get nothing but bad results.

Aim Low Shoot Lower must have been the motto at NBC when they cooked up this scheme.

You can't blame the Affiliates going nuts on bad pr. They don't care about PR they care about money. They were losing a lot of money because of this move, and they told NBC that this would be the case to begin with, and NBC seemingly did not care.

Find me a single non nbc-owned nbc affiliate who said before this happened that they expected this change to be good for their station.

This will go down as one of the biggest programming blunders in the history of television, if not the biggest. It wasn't like someone took a risk and failed. They set out on a path that had no chance of success.

TiVo'Brien

01-12-2010, 07:21 PM

I just bought a Conan Tonight Show t-shirt. Just in case.

Hansky

01-12-2010, 07:21 PM

More often than you think.

Unlikely.

If the contracts were always iron clad and crystal clear, there wouldn't be litigation.

That does not change, or respond to, my point. If the lawyers who represented the parties wanted to define the Tonight Show as the show that bears that name, and airs at 11:30 pm, they could have done so. Maybe they did? I have no idea. If they didn't, they didn't and it is highly unlikely any Judge would fill in a term like that. Two basic principles apply to all contracts -- If they can interpreted with simple language, there is no need to go further, and if a party wanted to include a provision they should have done so.

Edited to add -- I just read the article. That sums it up nicely.

The other issue is his damages. Would he sue for payments under the contract? That presumably he would still be receiving? Unless there is some kind of kicker based on ratings or similar factor, he is entitled to his paycheck.

steve614

01-12-2010, 07:22 PM

I'm still holding out for the reverse commute (i.e., a routine rebroadcasting of shows that were first-run on cable).
I would welcome this. It could be a win-win. The costs would be low (the show is already produced) and it would be good for people who use OTA only.

The folks who rely on OTA. If there aren't that many, then there is no need to present any scripted programming via OTA... just present it all on cable, charge higher subscription fees to pay for them, and be done with it.
Yeah, I believe there are a lot more OTA only users than most people think.
What we're seeing, here, is "negotiation by media manipulation".
Heh, the cable companies and networks do it, why not individuals? :p

DevdogAZ

01-12-2010, 07:25 PM

Actually the reality is reasonable people their goals were stupid from the beginning and even if they met their goals they were going to fail.

The problem with affiliates and lead ins was obvious even to a dummy like me. How can people who do this for a living not think that was going to be a problem?

The whole thing was poorly constructed and poorly thought out. Who cares if they met their goals? Their goals still equaled complete failure, which has come to pass.

Has nothing to do with "Bad PR". Has to do with bad results, predicated on decisions that guaranteed you would get nothing but bad results.

Aim Low Shoot Lower must have been the motto at NBC when they cooked up this scheme.

You can't blame the Affiliates going nuts on bad pr. They don't care about PR they care about money. They were losing a lot of money because of this move, and they told NBC that this would be the case to begin with, and NBC seemingly did not care.

Find me a single non nbc-owned nbc affiliate who said before this happened that they expected this change to be good for their station.

This will go down as one of the biggest programming blunders in the history of television, if not the biggest. It wasn't like someone took a risk and failed. They set out on a path that had no chance of success.
I think you missed the point of the post you replied to. You can claim it was a failure all you want, but the reality is that without the regulatory approval of the Comcast merger looming, NBC likely would have fought the affiliates and ensured that Leno stayed on for at least a year. They couldn't be in a public fight with dozens of affiliates at the same time they're asking the Justice Department to approve their proposed merger with Comcast, and they didn't want to risk the deal being shot down, or stricter measures being imposed simply because of the bad PR they would have from the affiliate fight. So they decided to back down rather than dig in their heels. In any other year, under any other circumstances, I don't think NBC would have been nearly as willing to cave.

smak

01-12-2010, 07:26 PM

I also note how O'Brien is reacting from an emotional standpoint, not really making any strong statements about contracts or legalities.

And that's to his credit. Whether he gets some big chunk of money because he's not doing 11:35 anymore doesn't seem to matter to him.

The Tonight Show to him is 11:30. If they want to stick him at midnight and call it the Tonight Show he's saying that's not The Tonight Show, and isn't what he was promised, and he doesn't want it.

-smak-

Turtleboy

01-12-2010, 07:27 PM

BTW, Letterman was awesome last night. (1/11/09). He did quite a few jokes about it. He even did his Leno impersonation. Paul was funny too. It's obvious that both Dave and Paul are still very bitter. But bitterness is what makes Dave funny.

DevdogAZ

01-12-2010, 07:42 PM

What NBC should have done is take the Jay Leno Show off the air for "retooling" and take a few weeks to see how The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien would fare without Leno dragging down the affiliates' 11pm rating and competing for guests.

If they go back to the damaged goods that is Jay Leno, he's got a shelf life of five years, maybe ten, and NBC doesn't have a viable replacement if they burn O'Brien. If they let Leno go, he may be a competitor, but it will probably be with a network without a tradition at 11:30. (ABC or Fox) and he's only a problem for a few years. If Conan goes to ABC or Fox, NBC could be faced with finding a replacement for Leno who can compete with a Conan O'Brien who has established a presence at 11:30 and has a 5-year head start.
The problem is, Conan is being hurt by the lack of viewers on NBC at 10 pm and for the 11 pm local newscasts. That problem isn't going away the second they take Leno off the air. In fact, it likely gets worse before it gets better, because NBC doesn't have anything to fill the 10 pm timeslot with. So simply pulling Leno to see how Conan does wouldn't tell them anything. They wouldn't be able to get any kind of true reading on how well Conan would do without Leno until next October or November, and only then if they actually develop some decent 10 pm dramas this pilot season.

JYoung

01-12-2010, 07:42 PM

bicker

01-12-2010, 07:52 PM

Right, and O.J. Simpson wouldn't say he was innocent unless he really was.That's a ridiculous perversion.

NBC is not O. J. Simpson.

NBC is not going to lie about the contract that they have with O'Brien.

Get a grip.

bicker

01-12-2010, 07:57 PM

If NBC says that x is the number we need for Leno to be succesful, and Leno hits x, and a lot of affiliates are upset, and think of bailing, then x really wasn't the correct number.Let's try that logic on for size:

If my wife and I say that $X is how much we need to retire, and we hit $X, and my children are upset that we didn't make enough to leave them more money when we die, then $X wasn't the correct number.

Ridiculous.

The affiliates are different companies. They are not the same company. Different.

Did they not remember their non o&o affiliates?They were trying to find a way to better live up to their fiduciary responsibility to their owners -- not a different company's owners.

bicker

01-12-2010, 08:04 PM

Actually the reality is reasonable people their goals were stupid from the beginning and even if they met their goals they were going to fail.No: Their goals were aimed to satisfy their owners, not the owners of other companies.

This turn of events means that they still have to come up with some other way -- a way that will piss their affiliates (and/or whiny viewers) off probably just as much if not more -- to do better for their owners, reflecting how much they need to cut costs to keep this investment still worthwhile.

The problem with affiliates and lead ins was obvious even to a dummy like me.It was even obvious to them. They spoke about it -- not in a gross and perverse manner, as perhaps you might have wanted them to -- but they did acknowledge that there would be impact on the affiliates.

How can people who do this for a living not think that was going to be a problem?How can they have thought that not programming first-run original series on Saturday nights was not going to be a problem?

Guess what! It ended up that it wasn't a problem, because no one successfully made a big deal about it.

There is no way to know what will or won't make it through the gauntlet in advance.

The whole thing was poorly constructed and poorly thought out.It was well-constructed and well thought-out. Not everything that is done well succeeds.

Who cares if they met their goals? Their owners, the folks to whom they owe overriding consideration.

Their goals still equaled complete failure, which has come to pass.No... failure is the result, and what you're using to justify your self-defining and therefore vacuous criticisms of their efforts.

Has nothing to do with "Bad PR".It has everything to do with bad PR.

smak

01-12-2010, 08:11 PM

Let's try that logic on for size:

If my wife and I say that $X is how much we need to retire, and we hit $X, and my children are upset that we didn't make enough to leave them more money when we die, then $X wasn't the correct number.

Ridiculous.

The affiliates are different companies. They are not the same company. Different.

They were trying to find a way to better live up to their fiduciary responsibility to their owners -- not a different company's owners.

Right, all those totally different companies who are the only way that 95% of the TV markets in the country get to see NBC programming.

Let's just forget about and ignore them. That seems like a recipe for disaster.

Like the disaster we saw this week.

Your analogy is horrible. NBC isn't dead, it's living. And the affiliates have power that your kids could never have, unless your kids have the power to kill you.

Look back at the thread. Most people were right, and you were wrong. Get over it. Look at the first post. The whole point of this thread was that affiliates were pissed off because of steep declines in the news ratings. Some people saw this coming 3 months ago.

Stinks that you didn't, but dems da breaks.

-smak-

terpfan1980

01-12-2010, 08:18 PM

What NBC should have done is take the Jay Leno Show off the air for "retooling" and take a few weeks to see how The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien would fare without Leno dragging down the affiliates' 11pm rating and competing for guests.

If they go back to the damaged goods that is Jay Leno, he's got a shelf life of five years, maybe ten, and NBC doesn't have a viable replacement if they burn O'Brien. If they let Leno go, he may be a competitor, but it will probably be with a network without a tradition at 11:30. (ABC or Fox) and he's only a problem for a few years. If Conan goes to ABC or Fox, NBC could be faced with finding a replacement for Leno who can compete with a Conan O'Brien who has established a presence at 11:30 and has a 5-year head start.

THIS ^^^ Absolutely this.

This has been about the best example of how to make every wrong decision you can possibly make. It makes the whole New Coke vs. Classic Coke look like just a small dot in the history books.

If they wanted the chance to bring Leno back then do as suggested here ^ and put Leno on the shelf for a bit and see just what happened with the Tonite show.

If they really had to play Solomon here and split the difference then they perhaps should have considered (and probably should have done this all along) having Leno get back ONE night per week in the original Tonite show slot and have Conan take care of the other nites. Push it to two nites if they absolutely had to with a ton of cross promotion between both hosts. That would have given both hosts a chance to ease into their new roles, and would have given viewers a chance to get used to things. If Leno absolutely beat the bejeezus out of Conan's numbers then they'd have had perfect justification to let him go. On the other hand if Leno's numbers started falling, and even if they didn't, they could ease him out of the job.

bicker

01-12-2010, 08:18 PM

Right, all those totally different companies who are the only way where 95% of the TV markets in the country get to see NBC programming.Who didn't like the fact that they weren't getting new programming to present on Saturdays either. But they weren't able to exploit PR that time, so they had to accept that cost-cutting.

They also weren't able to exploit PR when the networks increased commercial time per hour from 14 to 16 minutes. And from 12 to 14, 10 to 12, 8 to 10, etc.

Nor when the networks reduced series orders from 38 to 28 to 26 to 24 to 22, etc.

That seems like a recipe for disaster.And a whole night of reruns isn't?

Your analogy is horrible.No, it's actually great. If it was identical circumstances it would be a tautology, instead of an analogy.

Do your children get to pull the plug on you if you don't save enough money for them?Actually, they do, but that's another story.

Dude, look back at the thread. Most people were right, and you were wrong.About what, specifically? I suspect you don't even remember what I said earlier in the thread. Regardless, I'm talking about right now and how wrong you are right now.

smak

01-12-2010, 08:34 PM

No, i did read the other thread, and you were basically saying there was no way to tell whether NBC was happy with the ratings or not. And whether or not we like the situation or not, the only people who matter are the people at NBC.

Now, the only thing that matters is that it's over. It doesn't matter the reason, but the fact is all the problems noted in the other thread have come to fruition.

Everybody in the other thread who said this was a horrible decision by NBC, that it would have disastrous results, and hugely bad side effects that would echo across the entire network have been proven right.

-smak-

Turtleboy

01-12-2010, 09:26 PM

Check out the Letterman videos.

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/david-letterman-on-nbc-late-night-mess/

orangeboy

01-12-2010, 09:42 PM

Check out the Letterman videos.

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/david-letterman-on-nbc-late-night-mess/

Love it!

jk5598224

01-12-2010, 09:45 PM

Someone else mentioned the same, but why can't they get rid of Leno altogether. Leno couldn't be around tonight show for another 5-10 years? What then.

JimSpence

01-12-2010, 09:58 PM

Leave Coman where he is and then Jay could take them on in the same time slot on either Fox or even ABC (pushing Kimmel to 12:35).

Amnesia

01-12-2010, 09:59 PM

Someone else mentioned the same, but why can't they get rid of Leno altogether. Leno couldn't be around tonight show for another 5-10 years? What then.But why get rid of Leno instead of Conan?

When it was Jay vs. Dave, Jay won. When it was Conan vs. Dave, Dave won.
Why would NBC get rid of Jay? Yes, yes---the playing fields weren't exactly level, but still---it seems clear that Jay is the host who has proven he could beat Dave.

Sure, perhaps Jay won't be around after 10 years or so, but at least they'd have some time to deal with that problem. What if they got rid of Jay and Conan continued to flounder in the ratings? What would be their option in the spring or fall of this year?

morac

01-12-2010, 10:20 PM

http://tv.gawker.com/5445941/conan-obrien-eviscerates-nbc-jay-leno-updated-so-do-letterman-and-ferguson

So who's funnier Conan, Dave or Craig?

Wil

01-12-2010, 10:33 PM

So who's funnier Conan, Dave or Craig?bicker

mattack

01-12-2010, 10:54 PM

Gee, will Bill Carter write a book about *this* late night fiasco?

Conan is being screwed over.. but I actually feel a tiny bit sad for Leno since he looks like the bad guy. Though I *don't* watch the entire show, I will actually give him a bit of credit -- the 10pm show was *NOT* an exact copy of the tonight show. It was different, it was trying to do sort of a cross between an old variety show and a talk show.

and this is from someone who's way more of a Letterman fan than Leno.. (When the *previous* late show war went on, I sort of *wanted* Leno to win, since I realized they'd BOTH be on the air, and previously to him winning the Tonight Show, I used to think Leno could be hilarious.. in fact, many of Leno's appearances on Late Night were very very funny.)

MickeS

01-12-2010, 10:56 PM

Check out the Letterman videos.

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/david-letterman-on-nbc-late-night-mess/

Dave is a bitter old man, but I guess he feels he should stand up for his friend Conan. And it probably feels good to get back at Jay after having lost in the ratings for over a decade.

gastrof

01-13-2010, 12:27 AM

Leave Coman where he is and then Jay could take them on in the same time slot on either Fox or even ABC (pushing Kimmel to 12:35).

The other day ABC was reported as saying they don't want Jay or Conan. 'We're happy with what we currently have'.

marksman

01-13-2010, 12:28 AM

marksman

01-13-2010, 12:29 AM

The other day ABC was reported as saying they don't want Jay or Conan. 'We're happy with what we currently have'.

I think Jimmy Kimmel was really sweating before they came up with this plan to keep Leno around last time.

gastrof

01-13-2010, 12:33 AM

Everyone should just have primetime from 7 PM -10 PM like here. The tonight show starts at 10:35 PM here. :)

If the East Coast had prime time from 7 to 10, you'd get prime time from 6 to 9.

marksman

01-13-2010, 12:37 AM

Bicker... you seem to have a really problem with logic.

Seriously. You have no idea what you are talking about.

By your weird logic, you and your wife would tell your children, we are going to pay for all your college and give you each 5 million dollars when we die.

We are going to put away $100 a week.

Now come the end of your life you put away $100 a week, so you "met your goal." Yet you completely failed.

Literally EVERYONE in the United States knew this was going to fail except for you and the NBC executives.

MickeS

01-13-2010, 12:45 AM

If the East Coast had prime time from 7 to 10, you'd get prime time from 6 to 9.

Why? :confused:

MickeS

01-13-2010, 12:50 AM

Would be interesting to like give Jay one night a week of Conan's show and have conan do 4 nights or something, and or create like a 2 hour show for Jay like on Saturday. Since Saturday primetime is just reruns.

I would love a prime-time Saturday night variety show with good guests and performances. I'm a sucker for them. I think the current Jay Leno Show format would work well with that.

Not that I think it will happen though. :)

marksman

01-13-2010, 01:04 AM

Jimmy Kimmel did his whole show tonight as Jay Leno. :)

Test

01-13-2010, 01:09 AM

www.woot.com is with Coco

http://www.sirmikeofmitchell.com/imwithcoco/

gastrof

01-13-2010, 01:38 AM

Why? :confused:

Time zones. Central, for example, gets the same feed as the East Coast. The clocks just read different, that's all.

Otherwise the networks would have to send the Continental U.S. four different feeds, which I'm sure they'd love to hear someone suggest.

MickeS

01-13-2010, 01:47 AM

Time zones. Central, for example, gets the same feed as the East Coast. The clocks just read different, that's all.

Otherwise the networks would have to send the Continental U.S. four different feeds, which I'm sure they'd love to hear someone suggest.

I'm in Mountain time zone (Pacific +1). In summer, since we don't have DST, we are on the same time as Pacific. Our prime time is always 7 - 10 no matter what.

bicker

01-13-2010, 03:17 AM

Bicker... you seem to have a really problem with logic.No, not at all. You simply disagree with a business perspective. As a consumer with your mind firmly locked in consumer mode, that's not surprising.

Seriously. You have no idea what you are talking about.No: You have no idea what I'm talking about. Or rather, you probably do, but refuse to acknowledge it.

Literally EVERYONE in the United States knew this was going to fail except for you and the NBC executives.Your comment is utterly self-centered and myopic.

Ment

01-13-2010, 03:35 AM

Jimmy Kimmel did his whole show tonight as Jay Leno. :)

He's just another Ho but with MPD. Conan was on a roll to-night (he's the pretty one :D ).

bicker

01-13-2010, 05:26 AM

Also interesting that he doesn't take a public position on what his contract does or doesn't require NBC to give him.Apparently, he knew what he was doing, while his supporters on various blogs and message boards didn't. The more time goes on, the more information leaks out indicating that he doesn't have any contractual guarantees that his program will be broadcast at any specific time. His fans' claims, as I alluded to yesterday, all seem to emanate from an appeal to personal preference rather than from anything actually promised to O'Brien. Yesterday, several fans on various blogs and message boards tried to convince all who would read why everyone involved in this should defer to Conan's presumed entitlements, some referring to TMZ as one source for the foundation of their arguments in that regard, despite other news sources saying that NBC would not be in breach of contract with the moves they're planning on making. Now even TMZ has joined the New York Times and Reuters and granting that fact.

fmowry

01-13-2010, 06:23 AM

Jimmy Kimmel did his whole show tonight as Jay Leno. :)

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

Frank

realityboy

01-13-2010, 06:39 AM

Who didn't like the fact that they weren't getting new programming to present on Saturdays either. But they weren't able to exploit PR that time, so they had to accept that cost-cutting.

They also weren't able to exploit PR when the networks increased commercial time per hour from 14 to 16 minutes. And from 12 to 14, 10 to 12, 8 to 10, etc.

Nor when the networks reduced series orders from 38 to 28 to 26 to 24 to 22, etc.

They accepted those cost cutting measures because they didn't have a significant impact on their profit margins. Plus, those happened on all of the major networks so they didn't undercut the affiliates ability to compete. The affiliates are important to the network even if they are different companies. It's generally a mutually beneficial arrangement.

I blame them more so than NBC for the current failure. (The PR mess from trying to fix the failure is NBC's fault.)

NBC-"So affiliates were going to cut costs and get lower ratings every night, is that cool with you?"

Affiliates-"That sounds ok..."

3 months later

Affiliates-"Hey, NBC, these ratings aren't very good..."

NBC-"Right, we told you that they would be lower, but that we would save money..."

Affiliates-"But this is affecting us more than we thought it would."

NBC-"OK, these are the ratings that we promised. Shouldn't you have known what effect they would have on you?"

Affiliates then proceed to pout and threaten to stop showing Leno at 10pm even though it was getting the ratings that were promised.

bicker

01-13-2010, 07:33 AM

They accepted those cost cutting measures because ... they didn't have sufficient leverage to push the issue.

Plus, those happened on all of the major networks... but not all at once... just like this.

The affiliates are important to the network even if they are different companies.Important: Yes. However, the demands of the affiliates are not overriding considerations.

It's generally a mutually beneficial arrangement. If you're looking at it from above. From inside, it is more like a strategic alliance.

netringer

01-13-2010, 07:45 AM

More often than you think. If the contracts were always iron clad and crystal clear, there wouldn't be litigation.

Conan and NBC will settle for some fraction of the $40M or whatever he's owed under his contract.

Conan will want to shorten any non-compete term that there's in there, too. As with Dave, NBC might want to keep the Tonight Show as is long enough to not have to refund money from advertisers, although the time change would hit that anyway.

Turtleboy

01-13-2010, 09:15 AM

http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/012/7/6/I__m_with_Coco_by_MikePMitchell.jpg

pcguru83

01-13-2010, 09:41 AM

Good summary of the jabs all the late night hosts took last night. They seem to be overwhelmingly supporting Conan.

http://watching-tv.ew.com/2010/01/13/conan-obrien-letterman-jay-leno-kimmel-american-idol/

TiVo'Brien

01-13-2010, 09:58 AM

bicker

01-13-2010, 09:58 AM

Wouldn't it be great if all bloggers made their bias so clear? :)

Amnesia

01-13-2010, 09:59 AM

They seem to be overwhelmingly supporting Conan.Conan vs. NBC, sure. Dave seems to be the only one taking cracks at Leno...

pcguru83

01-13-2010, 10:01 AM

Conan vs. NBC, sure. Dave seems to be the only one taking cracks at Leno...
Not really. Kimmel did his whole monologue dressed up as Leno (and doing his horrible Leno voice the whole time).

FilmCritic3000

01-13-2010, 10:08 AM

You stay classy, Jeff Zucker.

http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2010/01/12/a-brief-moment-of-jeff-zucker-related-schadenfreude/

Too small to pursue his fantasy of playing football for the Miami Dolphins, Zucker took to writing local sports stories for The Miami Herald. He continued his writing career as an undergraduate at Harvard University, where he covered sports for The Harvard Crimson. He later became president of the publication. It was at Harvard that Zucker first met Conan O'Brien, now an NBC late-night host, who worked for humor magazine the Harvard Lampoon. As a prank, O'Brien's staff stole all the Crimson issues one day before they could be delivered. Zucker called the cops. "My first meeting with Jeff Zucker was in handcuffs, with a Cambridge police officer reading me my rights," says O'Brien.

FilmCritic3000

01-13-2010, 10:10 AM

ElJay

01-13-2010, 10:31 AM

TMZ is saying Leno has 10pm in his contract but Conan's just says "The Tonight Show"

http://www.tmz.com/2010/01/13/conan-obrien-jay-leno-the-tonight-show-nbc-contract-time-period/

As for Conan's legal position, his claim is a lot more tenuous than first reported to us. We're told Conan is arguing -- given the history of "The Tonight Show" -- there is an "implied" guarantee the show would begin at 11:35. Our sources say Conan's people met with NBC execs yesterday afternoon ... presumably to negotiate a settlement and an out.

DavidTigerFan

01-13-2010, 10:42 AM

:up:

Jay should go to Fox and that would fix everything.

That's what NBC was trying to avoid. Jay would destroy Conan if he were put head to head. I'm not sure what would happen though since most fox stations air their news at 10pm.

bicker

01-13-2010, 11:08 AM

TMZ is saying Leno has 10pm in his contract but Conan's just says "The Tonight Show"

http://www.tmz.com/2010/01/13/conan-obrien-jay-leno-the-tonight-show-nbc-contract-time-period/It took them long enough.

This is clearly the reason why, yesterday, NBC was talking in tangible terms, while Conan was trying to emotionally influence public opinion. It was trivial to see the difference between the two tactics, and with sufficient perspective it wasn't hard to tell what the contract actually specified. This was what I was trying to get aintnosin to understand yesterday, but he simply refused to acknowledge it.

DeDondeEs

01-13-2010, 11:15 AM

Jimmy "Leno" Kimmel was pretty funny last night:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMgPPJZfsCM&feature=player_embedded

If one of these guys could move to Fox they could have a 11pm slot. The Fox News around here at least is from 10-11pm. That slot would be ideal because then its not too late, and they are going up against the local news on the other networks, and the Daily Show / Colbert Report on cable.

I can't stand the local news anyway, it is just a summary of all of the horrible things that happened during the day, who needs that before bed?

Bierboy

01-13-2010, 11:30 AM

....Jay would destroy Conan if he were put head to head.....

I don't buy that...they appeal to two TOTALLY different audiences (IMO) and there's more than enough to go around....
My 26 year old son would watch Conan anytime, but never watch Leno.

aindik

01-13-2010, 11:33 AM

If it wasn't for the fact that Fox, the rest of the time, targets younger viewers than NBC does, Leno on Fox at 11 p.m. would make a lot of sense. Earlier start time (for his older audience) and not acting as a lead-in for any other show.

DeDondeEs

01-13-2010, 11:51 AM

IMO I think Conan has better writing, but he is awkward on camera and when interviewing (which he often uses to his advantage). Leno is more polished and does good interviews, but his jokes are corny. On Leno the band playing that horn/bass/drum rimshot type thing after every joke gets old, like a laugh track. I know they do that on Conan too but it just doesn't seem as obnoxious.

One person who must be loving this is Letterman, this has totally taken the spotlight off of him from those flings he had with employees.

bicker

01-13-2010, 11:56 AM

So they should hire O'Brien to write for Leno.

realityboy

01-13-2010, 12:08 PM

If you're looking at it from above. From inside, it is more like a strategic alliance.

I agree with this. I'm not sure that I get the practical difference between a mutually beneficial arrangement and your description of it as a strategic alliance. Usually their goals line up. Sometimes they don't. It's not like either one has any motive other than profit. I'm looking at it from inside a local affiliate since I happen to work at one. (Not an NBC affiliate.)

I still say that the other changes that you mentioned were not as harmful to their bottom line as this one turned out to be.

bicker

01-13-2010, 12:27 PM

I'm not sure that I get the practical difference between a mutually beneficial arrangement and your description of it as a strategic alliance. CBS and Warner Brothers have a "mutually-beneficial arrangement" in the CW. The United States and Pakistan have a strategic alliance with regard to Al Qaeda.

It's not like either one has any motive other than profit.The difference is that networks and affiliates don't split a single source of profit. They each run their own businesses, and arrive at their own bottom-lines independently.

realityboy

01-13-2010, 12:47 PM

CBS and Warner Brothers have a "mutually-beneficial arrangement" in the CW. The United States and Pakistan have a strategic alliance with regard to Al Qaeda.

The difference is that networks and affiliates don't split a single source of profit. They each run their own businesses, and arrive at their own bottom-lines independently.

I know the profits come from different places. That's why their goals don't always align. I just said that. I don't disagree with you on that point, and the first point is a minor semantic thing. It's not like the contracts with the affiliates actually say either of the phrases that we're using. I actually reluctantly agree with you on most of your points in these 2 threads.

MickeS

01-13-2010, 01:08 PM

Why did Kimmel do his show as Leno? What's his beef in all of this?

Amnesia

01-13-2010, 01:40 PM

Why did Kimmel do his show as Leno? What's his beef in all of this?Late night hosts are not supposed to do jokes because they have a "beef". They're supposed to do them to amuse their audience...

DevdogAZ

01-13-2010, 01:51 PM

That's what NBC was trying to avoid. Jay would destroy Conan if he were put head to head. I'm not sure what would happen though since most fox stations air their news at 10pm.
According to Fox president Kevin Reilly, Fox has the rights in their affiliate agreements to put on a late-night show at 11:00 pm and force the affiliates to carry it. However, he said that they wouldn't be so cavalier about it, because the affiliates have just come through a difficult business cycle and most make quite a bit of money airing syndicated reruns in that slot. So it Fox could make it work for Conan if they want to, but it might be a little painful for Fox affiliates.

DevdogAZ

01-13-2010, 02:22 PM

Someone else mentioned the same, but why can't they get rid of Leno altogether. Leno couldn't be around tonight show for another 5-10 years? What then.
NBC doesn't want to get rid of either one. They would have to pay a big penalty if they fire either one of them, and either one could go and compete against them on another network. As for why they appear to be favoring Leno over Conan, I'm guessing that after seeing Conan do The Tonight Show for seven months and seeing that the ratings weren't nearly what they expected, the bloom is off the rose. He's not nearly the hot commodity that he was this time last year. Maybe they've decided that keeping a known quantity (Leno) is better than keeping a project (Conan).
Time zones. Central, for example, gets the same feed as the East Coast. The clocks just read different, that's all.

Otherwise the networks would have to send the Continental U.S. four different feeds, which I'm sure they'd love to hear someone suggest.
They already send three different feeds. What's the big deal if they send a fourth? Or maybe the affiliates in the Mountain time zone just record the Eastern feed and play it back at the appropriate time, in which case the affiliates in the Central time zone could do that too. Either way, it seems like a pretty minor technical hurdle.

terpfan1980

01-13-2010, 02:23 PM

According to Fox president Kevin Reilly, Fox has the rights in their affiliate agreements to put on a late-night show at 11:00 pm and force the affiliates to carry it. However, he said that they wouldn't be so cavalier about it, because the affiliates have just come through a difficult business cycle and most make quite a bit of money airing syndicated reruns in that slot. So it Fox could make it work for Conan if they want to, but it might be a little painful for Fox affiliates.

In theory it would seem that FOX could make a ton of money getting Conan and running a show at 11 p.m., basically doing at 11 what NBC had wanted to do at 10 p.m. with Leno -- cheap programming aimed at a late night audience. Even if they have to spend $50 million per year for Conan and/or all of the people behind the show, they should be able to sell ad time for far more than that.

The question would then be whether or not they'd get enough of an audience to keep affiliates happy with their share of the ad revenue that would come through.

There's a lot of potential benefit for FOX in running a show with either Leno or Conan though (more likely Conan than Leno since it seems that NBC just can't quit Leno), cross promotion of other programs on the network, cross promotion of FOX and partner films, etc.

DevdogAZ

01-13-2010, 02:30 PM

In theory it would seem that FOX could make a ton of money getting Conan and running a show at 11 p.m., basically doing at 11 what NBC had wanted to do at 10 p.m. with Leno -- cheap programming aimed at a late night audience. Even if they have to spend $50 million per year for Conan and/or all of the people behind the show, they should be able to sell ad time for far more than that.

The question would then be whether or not they'd get enough of an audience to keep affiliates happy with their share of the ad revenue that would come through.

There's a lot of potential benefit for FOX in running a show with either Leno or Conan though (more likely Conan than Leno since it seems that NBC just can't quit Leno), cross promotion of other programs on the network, cross promotion of FOX and partner films, etc.
According to Reilly, the affiliates won't have a choice if that's what Fox decides to do. It's already a clause in their affiliate contracts. And without an impending regulatory review, like the Comcast/NBCU deal, the Fox affiliates wouldn't have the same clout that the NBC affiliates did.

One source I read said that it would likely cost $70 million for Fox to get a late night show up and running, and taking the numbers fromt the Leno 10 pm show show and cutting back by 25%, it would likely cost another $70 million per year to operate the show. Could they make that back in ad revenue? Probably. But it's not a slam dunk. Since Leno left TTS, the overall audience for network late night shows has shrunk dramatically. There is increased competition from cable (Stewart, Colbert, Chelsea, Lopez). Fox's show would be competing against Leno and Letterman. The economic climate for starting a new show and selling that new ad time is not favorable. There are a lot of factors for Fox to consider before jumping into this decision.

MickeS

01-13-2010, 02:55 PM

Late night hosts are not supposed to do jokes because they have a "beef". They're supposed to do them to amuse their audience...

Yeah, I know that. But getting dressed up as Leno and making fun of him is a little more than just "doing jokes", which is why I was wondering if there's some sort of history between the two of them.

Bierboy

01-13-2010, 02:57 PM

According to Popeater. (http://www.popeater.com/2010/01/13/jay-leno-leaving-nbc/Popeater.)

DevdogAZ

01-13-2010, 03:03 PM

Yeah, I know that. But getting dressed up as Leno and making fun of him is a little more than just "doing jokes", which is why I was wondering if there's some sort of history between the two of them.
I don't think he was making fun of Leno personally as much as he was simply making fun of the fact that Leno (because of NBC's poor decisions) is essentially taking over Conan's timeslot. So his joke was that Leno is taking over all late-night TV timeslots, even his timeslot on ABC (which apparently stands for "Always Bump Conan").

cmontyburns

01-13-2010, 03:07 PM

I don't think ht was making fun of Leno personally as much as he was simply making fun of the fact that Leno (because of NBC's poor decisions) is essentially taking over Conan's timeslot. So his joke was that Leno is taking over all late-night TV timeslots, even his timeslot on ABC (which apparently stands for "Always Bump Conan").

I think that's right, but that there also is some subtext. Not anti-Leno -- at least, mostly not -- but pro-Conan. If you're a late-night talkshow host, you're in a very small fraternity. From what I've read, behind the scenes most of them have quietly felt that NBC has been treating O'Brien badly for years. Skits like Kimmel's are a way of showing solidarity with Conan, as NBC sticks it to him one more time.

pcguru83

01-13-2010, 03:07 PM

Great, now a third thread to follow. :p

Good riddance Jay! Welcome back Conan!

DevdogAZ

01-13-2010, 03:08 PM

I'll believe it when I see some official sources, not just a "TV insider."

But can't we merge all these Leno/Conan threads? It seems that we've got the same discussion (with many identical posts) going on in three different threads.

Enrique

01-13-2010, 03:08 PM

I hope they both walk, NBC don't deserve any of them.

BIH NBC.

cmontyburns

01-13-2010, 03:11 PM

But why get rid of Leno instead of Conan?

Time magazine's James Poniewozik deals with that question (http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2010/01/13/nbcs-conanundrum-is-jay-the-smart-choice/), adroitly I think, in a blog post today. His summation:

The bottom line is that Jay is certainly the better short-term pick. Long-term, Conan has more upside and more downside. And that may be what does him in. NBC has very likely decided to get out of the risk-taking business.

Hard to argue with that.

ToddNeedsTiVo

01-13-2010, 03:12 PM

Never understood the whole silly prime time difference among the time zones. One feed simultaneously provides programming to both Eastern and Central from 8-11pm and 7-10pm local, respectively. Then another feed an hour later for Mountain, 7-10 local. Then yet another feed, TWO hours later, so that Pacific has its prime time from 8-11 local.

Weird.

fmowry

01-13-2010, 03:15 PM

smak

01-13-2010, 03:16 PM

It took them long enough.

This is clearly the reason why, yesterday, NBC was talking in tangible terms, while Conan was trying to emotionally influence public opinion. It was trivial to see the difference between the two tactics, and with sufficient perspective it wasn't hard to tell what the contract actually specified. This was what I was trying to get aintnosin to understand yesterday, but he simply refused to acknowledge it.

Conan releasing his statement was a "tactic" that his people advised against.

You don't think it's possible that Conan actually believes what he says, that The Tonight Show at 12:05 isn't The Tonight Show he had wanted to host forever, and he doesn't want any part of it.

This could lose Conan money in the end. There's no automatic place that he's going to end up like Dave had. FOX is not a slam dunk for him either.

I think there's a pretty big difference in 11:35 and 12:05. The Tonight Show is most famous for it's opening monologue where the host makes jokes about the days events. Having a show preceding it basically ruins the whole concept of the show.

-smak-

Enrique

01-13-2010, 03:21 PM

Great, now a third thread to follow. :p

Good riddance Jay! Welcome back Conan!Welcome back Conan? According to the link ""Now that Conan has made it clear he is leaving the troubled network,"

If Jay does walk why would just that fact make Conan stay? I think they would be pretty dumb of him(Seeing as NBC has basically told him your worth nothing to us).

If his does stay when/if Jay walks then he would be pretty much NBC's Ho

JYoung

01-13-2010, 03:22 PM

uncdrew

01-13-2010, 03:22 PM

Could Johnny Carson come back?

Please...

bicker

01-13-2010, 03:23 PM

Conan releasing his statement was a "tactic" that his people advised against.An assertion by Conan's camp that could itself be a tactic.

You don't think it's possible that Conan actually believes what he saysDitto, substituting "Leno" for "Conan". It all works both ways. That was the point, all along.

This could lose Conan money in the end.Or gain Conan money in the end. That's why it is called risk.

pcguru83

01-13-2010, 03:28 PM

Welcome back Conan? According to the link ""Now that Conan has made it clear he is leaving the troubled network,"

If Jay does walk why would just that fact make Conan stay? I think they would be pretty dumb of him(Seeing as NBC has basically told him your worth nothing to us).

If his does stay when/if Jay walks then he would be pretty much NBC's Ho
I got the impression from Conan's statement that he was simply leaving if his show was moved to 12:05a. He even mentions still being in active negotiations with NBC. Granted, those probably didn't include an option of him staying given that the Leno plan looked to be a done deal, but that may change if Leno leaves.