Why is BB so alone?
TV ClubHouse: Archive: Archive FOUR:
Why is BB so alone?
Klm72 | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 07:25 am     I am surprised that after 3 yrs in this country and more in others, that BB hasn't spawned any copycats. Obviously there are tons of so-called reality shows, but I mean the internet aspect. There could be lots of variations on the "living under TV AND internet camera scrutiny" theme- as game shos, general interest shows, etc. Why do you think the phenom hasn't taken off more? |
Trulyscrumtious | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 08:58 am     What about 'Under One Roof'? Come to think of it...What in Sam Hill happened to that show? *lol* |
Jagger | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 09:18 am     Klm72 I wondered that too, with the success BB had with the internet viewers I thought maybe Survivor would try something like that. Most reality shows though would have a hard time moving to the internet unless if they were designed in the same format as BB, where they were together all the time, it would be too hard for the filming of it if they weren't issolated. |
Crossfire | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 10:08 am     BB was not completely alone in the internet angle of reality TV, there was a program in Toronto called The Lofters which ran for two seasons 6 nights a week on a specialty chanel, plus internet coverage. |
Draheid | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 10:15 am     As far as I can tell, this year has been the really 'Banner' (ok, no banners as we know them *sigh*) for Big Brother in the ratings. I expect the other networks might pick up on this and run with it. Having beat American Idol several times, considering AI is planning another installment, BB4 is almost a certainty at this point. Expect the Unexpected when they roll out shows like "We See You", "Here's Looking at YOU", "You Can't Hide", "Nowhere to Run", etc in the next couple of years. Then again, Endemol (I think that's the founder of BB) just might have a very strong copyright to the program so much so that others are afraid to attempt a copycat program. I notice there aren't any really 'identical' reality shows on the air now that I can think of. Correct me if I'm wrong, but each show appears to have a completely different format from the others. |
Countrymeadow | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 10:27 am     I did hear of 1 new reality show coming on Tv this December. It's a house filled with Komodo dragons, monitor lizards and Iguanas. The pretext is that a human is kept in a 3x5 cage and they are to take care of this person for 3 months. It's fed PBJ sammiches twice a day and misted with a garden hose every other day. Sounds like fun. Interaction is highly required however, I doubt that it will happen. |
Draheid | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 10:47 am     Talk about a real lizard cam ... but what about the FOTH? What do you think that will look like? |
Pugholio | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:29 pm     Like any other thing on TV, the purpose of the program is to attract an audience for advertisers. The internet viewers are such a small amount of the total viewership, it's practically meaningless. Some people have to work and can't sit here complaining about not getting to see anything all day. If the show can't make it on broadcast TV, it's not going to make it. |
Trulyscrumtious | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:50 pm     Duh, I just realized you were asking about the internet aspect. 'Under One Roof' doesn't exactly qualify now does it, lol. I need sleeeeeeeep!!!  |
Draheid | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 12:55 pm     To further support Pugholio's position, as I recall, it was stated that Real logged about 53,000 subscribers via the BB3 website. The ratings for the TV show indicate around 10,000,000 viewers. Plus, to really make the internet portion worth the effort, the show would have to be 'real-time' otherwise it just wouldn't work. Imagine if there were live feeds of Survivor. Since it's tape-delayed, the viewership would likely go way down since the outcome was already known before it even airs. |
Ministryoftruth | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 01:18 pm     With 53,000 internet fans subscribing at $24.95 each, that totals $1,322,350. That covers the prize money and then some. You'd think we'd get at least some respect and consideration. |
Draheid | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 01:22 pm     Ministryoftruth: Of that $1.3M, you must deduct the cost of the servers, broadcasting equipment, bandwidth, management and maintenance of all equipment, all the staffing and customer service/support/etc., any related licensing fees, etc. etc. etc. I doubt if CBS or ASP see even a quarter of that money when it's all said and done. JMO - FWIW |
Crossfire | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 01:57 pm     Actually, my understanding, is that Real pays CBS/ASP money for the exclusive rights to carry the feeds. The amount of which is unknown. The $1.3M would be what Real receives for its efforts with which it needs to cover the cost it incurred in obtaining the rights to the programming, and of course offset its own infrastructure costs. This is a service which Real networks is already equipped to handle, and something they could do at a lower cost than CBS/ASP could. With CBS/ASP being one step removed from the internet customers, already having the money in the bank, you can gain an appreciation for the apparent treatment of the internet subscribers. My best guess, is that this is how it has been since the beginning of season two. Season one was probably on the dime of CBS/Endermol, and the free feeds were considered a cost of doing business, which probably ended up being a lot higher than anticipated which is why it changed after season one. Offer something for free, and people will take it, the cost was probably outrageous for the first season and only partly offset by an advertising partnership with AOL. After AOL merged with cable network Time Warner, that was no longer possible. With paid subscriptions, Real gets something it needs which is content for its network that people are willing to pay for, and CBS/ASP gets to more or less wash its hands of the whole thing, pocket a bit of coin, and validate the concept of the show on the cheap. |
Saggkl | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 03:04 pm     But didn't the viewer count go up because of the live feeds? Didn't the feeds garner more interest in the show? |
Niceguy | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 05:27 pm     Didn't the PLAYBOY channel try something along these lines? What ever happened to that? |
Betty | Friday, September 27, 2002 - 05:54 pm     Survivor on the net? I-don't-think-so. Mark is too into his creative editing to have his brain child turned over to the minions. |
Lipservice | Saturday, September 28, 2002 - 10:23 am     Apparently the first BB grossed 10 million for CBS, and the second one brought in 40 million (after they ditched John De Mol as producer and hired Arnold Shapiro to tweak the show). This years ratings are up substantially over last year so CBS stands to make around 60 million. Every network would love to have that kind of summer success but all these reality shows were imported from somewhere else - I don't think there are any good concepts left untried. |
Bailey | Saturday, September 28, 2002 - 10:55 am     The new show about "real life Beverly Hillbillies" is supposed to debut next year. (I believe on CBS). The format is to have some country bumpkin family move into a Beverly Hills mansion and observe their new lifestyle complete with visiting relatives, etc. It's an insulting format for some, but personally I think it will be hysterical. Does anyone know if this will be on the internet? If so, it could be a hoot. |
|