Hot Off The Press! The Latest Television News and Info [Text View] - Page 97

fredfa

03-21-07, 11:56 AM

Weekly Nielsen Notebook
Analysis: National Ratings in Prime Time:
Week of March 12-18, 2007
By Marc Berman MediaWeek.com March 21, 2007

Led by the mammoth American Idol, Fox was on the forefront, with a first-place finish in households, total viewers and key adults 18-49, adults 25-54 and adults 18-34 for the week of March 12. Comparably, and excluding households, Fox was off by minor proportions from one year earlier. CBS finished second in the five surveyed categories, with losses of as much as 17 percent among adults 25-54. ABC and NBC shared the No. 3 and 4 spots, with both networks down from the year-ago week, while cellar-dweller The CW remains a noticeable disappointment in year one.

In series-premiere news, the Thursday 10 p.m. battle of ABC’s October Road vs. a preview of NBC’s Raines (which moves into its regularly scheduled Friday 9 p.m. time period on March 30) resulted as follows:

Thursday 10 p.m.
October Road (ABC)
Viewers: 13.93 million (#9 overall), A18-49: 5.6/15 (#5)

Raines (NBC)
Viewers: 10.46 million (#23), A18-49: 2.9/ 8 (#29t)

Comparatively, and ignited by lead-in Grey’s Anatomy, October Road was the third-highest rated scripted series debut this season among adults 18-49 (behind ABC’s Brothers & Sisters and NBC’s Heroes), and it was the top-rated series-opener of the season among women 18-34 (7.9/22). Among adults 18-49, October Road was ABC’s highest-rated Thursday night scripted series debut since March 3, 1994. Worth noting for Raines, meanwhile, was growth out of the debut of sitcom Andy Barker, P.I. (Viewers: #63, 5.96 million; A18-49: #46t, 2.4/ 6 at 9:30 p.m.) of a significant 4.50 million viewers and 21 percent among adults 18-49). Retention for October Road out of Grey’s Anatomy was 61 percent in viewers and 62 percent in the demo.

Over at Fox, the Wednesday 9:30 p.m. time period premiere of ‘Til Death (Viewers: #8, 14.07 million; A18-49: #4, 5.8/15) out of the live American Idol results show hit a series high, of course. But retention out of Idol of just 54 percent in total viewers and 57 percent among adults 18-49 means that returning next season is still iffy. Also on Fox was the Thursday 8 p.m. time period debut of Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader (Viewers: #12, 12.56 million; A18-49: #8t, 4.6/13), the network’s highest rated performance in the hour with regularly scheduled programming in over 8 years, and the Friday 9 p.m. time period debut of The Wedding Bells, a new dramedy from David E. Kelley. The Wedding Bells scored a lackluster 5.75 million viewers (#66) and a 1.8/ 5 among adults 18-49 (#75).

March Madness on CBS, meanwhile, opened at levels close to one year earlier. Take a look:

NCAA Basketball Tournament (CBS)
-Thursday 8-9:30 p.m. – Viewers: 8.88 million (#31), A18-49: 2.9/10 (#29t)
-Thursday 9:30-11 p.m. – Viewers: 8.56 million (#33), A18-49: 3.4/10 (#25)
-Friday 8-9:30 p.m. – Viewers: 8.48 million (#34), A18-49: 2.9/11 (#29t)
-Friday 9:30-11 p.m. – Viewers: 9.09 million (#29), A18-49: 3.6/12 (#18t)

In season-finale news, NBC Friday 8 p.m. game show I vs. 100 earned its renewal stripes with a comfortable 9.13 million viewers (first in the time period behind basketball) and a 2.4/ 8 among adults 18-49 (second behind basketball). Two more episodes of Fox sitcom The Winner signed off on Sunday with 5.55 million viewers (#72) and a 2.7/ 7 among adults 18-49 (#37t) at 8:30 p.m., and 5.14 million viewers (#79) and a 2.6/ 6 in the demo (#41t) at 9:30 p.m. Considering that retention out of a Family Guy encore at 9 p.m. was just 73 percent in total viewers and 74 percent in the demo, say goodbye to this loser.

Recently introduced shows also waiting for the axe to swing are NBC’s The Black Donnellys (Viewers: #55, 6.53 million; A18-49: #44t, 2.5/ 7) and Grease: You’re the One That I Want (Viewers: #51, 6.67 million; A18-49: #71t, 1.9/ 5). But the return of NBC game show Identity (which moves into the Friday 8 p.m. hour this week) netted better results out of 1 vs. 100 with 9.05 million viewers (#30) and a 2.8/ 8 in the demo (#34t). Also returning were two episodes of CBS sitcom The New Adventures of Old Christine, which performed as follows in the Monday 8 p.m. hour.

The New Adventures of Old Christine
Monday 8:00 p.m. – Viewers: 7.59 million (#41), A18-49: 2.4/ 7 (#46t)
Monday 8:30 p.m. – Viewers: 8.34 million (#36), A18-49: 2.9/ 8 (#29t)

Here are the final national ratings for the week of March 12, 2007 (with percent change versus the comparable year-ago period in parentheses for the Big 4 -- the CW is not included), followed by the top 30 ranked programs for the week in total viewers and adults 18-49.

Households:
Fox: 7.0 rating/11 share (no change)
CBS: 6.9/12 (-13)
NBC: 5.4/ 9 (-10)
ABC: 5.2/ 9 (-15)
CW: 2.1/ 3

Total Viewers:
Fox: 11.35 million (- 3)
CBS: 10.73 (-12)
NBC: 8.27 (-10)
ABC: 7.86 (-17)
CW: 3.10

Adults 18-49:
Fox: 4.4 rating/12 share (-12)
CBS: 3.4/10 (-13)
ABC: 2.8/ 8 (-20)
NBC: 2.5/ 7 (-22)
CW: 1.2/ 3

Adults 25-54:
Fox: 4.8/12 (- 9)
CBS: 4.0/11 (-17)
ABC: 3.2/ 8 (-22)
NBC: 3.0/ 8 (-21)
CW: 1.1/ 3

Adults 18-34:
Fox: 3.9/12 (-15)
CBS: 2.8/ 9 (- 7)
ABC: 2.4/ 8 (-11)
NBC: 1.8/ 6 (-31)
CW: 1.4/ 4

• Source: Nielsen Media Research data

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/newsletters/proginsider/index.jsp

dad1153

03-21-07, 11:58 AM

Roger Friedman over at Fox News has posted a mini-review of the first two episodes of Season 7 of The Sopranos: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,260084,00.html. Needless to say if you'd rather watch these "Sopranos" episodes in the dark do not click to link since there are (minor) spoilers in the story. BTW, last night I saw my first "Sopranos" episode in HD (HBO HD is repeating the last season every Monday at 10PM), the one where Vito rear-ended and then shot the other guy in the back... I'm talking cars and bullets here people! :eek: All I have to say is W-O-W, I'm glad I got the HDTV just in time to see one of my all-time favorite shows bow out in glorious style (and in high definition to boot).

fredfa

03-21-07, 12:02 PM

An added note on the Cox plan to rebate last year's MLB-EI subs $89 if they pay for this year's cost of the basic MLB.com game package....

According to MultiChannel News "...Officials at Time Warner Cable and Cablevision Systems said they don’t plan to follow Cox’s lead and offer an $89 rebate for baseball’s broadband-video package...."

fredfa

03-21-07, 12:10 PM

Ms. Stanley sometimes comes up with some oddball ideas, (and loves to use words which send you scurrying to a dictionary), but she sure can write.
This is a great read.
And how about her opening sentence?
Critic’s Notebook
In the Arms of Scandal, and Ready to Cha-Cha
By Alessandra Stanley The New York Times March 21, 2007

The British use America the way we use rehab.

Before Heather Mills, there was Sarah Ferguson, the divorced Duchess of York, who, after being photographed topless while a suitor sucked her toes, sought refuge in America and became its sweetheart as a spokeswoman for Weight Watchers. The literary model is Marie Melmotte, the daughter of a disgraced London financier who wiped her slate clean by crossing the Atlantic in “The Way We Live Now,” a novel by Anthony Trollope. (No relation.)

Ms. Mills, who became one of the most hated women in Britain after her messy, tabloid-intensive split with Paul McCartney, pulled off an amazing feat on Monday’s live, two-hour season premiere of the ABC hit series “Dancing With the Stars,” a contest that is as much about redemption as it is about the rumba. And it wasn’t just that she managed, despite a prosthetic leg, to perform a graceful fox trot to Irving Berlin’s “Cheek to Cheek.”

Ms. Mills, who was a model when she was hit by a police motorcycle while crossing a London street in 1993, is an animal rights activist and also lobbies against land mines. She was identified on the show as a “charity campaigner,” and throughout it she successfully expunged any trace of her estranged billionaire husband and what the British gossip columns delight in describing as his Heather-hating children.

“I am not taking the competition too seriously,” she said serenely on “Entertainment Tonight” on Monday. “Because my life is so serious, with land mines and animal rights and everything.”

Even “The Insider” skipped the usual paparazzi shots on Monday and showed a clip of Ms. Mills staging a nighttime raid a few weeks ago on a pig farm in Somerset, England, to expose what she described as “disgusting conditions.” The segment wasn’t long enough, however, to make clear why that is such a bad thing in a pigsty. (Ms. Mills and the animal rights group Viva! object to the use of confining pens for sows.)

In short, “Dancing” is the perfect second chance for Ms. Mills, and she is the perfect “Dancing” diva: a celebrity shaking off a cloud of bad publicity and willing to brave a disability and ballroom dance in front of more than 21 million people.

She also proved quite charming off the dance floor, saying that her sparkly, sequined yellow and hot pink ball gown made her feel like “an ice cream sundae.”

ABC ruthlessly advertised her disability with promos that zoomed in on her bag of prosthetic limbs and drumrolled the possibility that she would fall on her face. Ms. Mills was more down to earth, saying in interviews that as a person who learned to ski with one leg, she was fairly confident she could hold her own on the dance floor. She said she hoped her performance would inspire young people who had lost a limb.

And one of the strengths of this peculiar and irresistible show is that even though Ms. Mills’s story trumps all others, by evening’s end, she blended into the larger ensemble.

“Dancing” combines the retro cheesiness of “The Lawrence Welk Show” with the artful kitsch of “Strictly Ballroom.” It brings together a colorful array of celebrities who seem plucked from an episode of “Murder, She Wrote”; this season the contestants include a 1980s supermodel, Paulina Porizkova; a basketball star, Clyde Drexler; a former anchor of “Entertainment Tonight,” Leeza Gibbons; and the actor who played Cliff the Mailman on “Cheers,” John Ratzenberger. He declared he was dancing on behalf of all baby boomers. Younger viewers got an Olympic speed skating champion, Apolo Anton Ohno.

All the contestants are admirably disciplined about rehearsing and staying in character. “You can take the boy out of Kentucky,” the country singer Billy Ray Cyrus said. “But you can’t take Kentucky out of the boy.” Mr. Drexler, the basketball star, obligingly put his cha-cha lessons into hoop terms. “I wasn’t really trying to do everything in practice,” he said. “I live for the game.”

The Czech-born Ms. Porizkova tugged on the Iron Curtain. “Do not question the system,” her partner told her. Ms. Porizkova replied, “That’s what they said in the Communist countries.”

But the deeper appeal of “Dancing With the Stars” is simpler. Dancing, particularly ballroom dancing, is a lost art that everyone has a vestigial feel for in his or her toes. The competition taps into that yearning and weaves around it a melodrama of perseverance, defeat and triumph over adversity — or low expectations.

After Ms. Mills’s performance, Bruno Tonioli, a judge, told her, “You have more guts than Rambo.” Actually, what she really demonstrated is that Americans will always love a Rocky.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/21/arts/television/21watc.html?pagewanted=print

fredfa

03-21-07, 12:15 PM

Overnights in the 18-49 Demo
'Idol' brunt: Fox rivals resign to reruns
Two-hour reality episode averages an 11.6
By Toni Fitzgerald MediaLifeMagazine.com staff writer March 21, 2007

“American Idol” continues to stomp the competition on the other Big Five English-language networks, though last night much of that competition was in reruns.

“Idol” averaged an 11.6 adults 18-49 rating from 8 to 10 p.m., according to Nielsen overnights, or 38 percent ahead of the combined 8.4 average of ABC, CBS, NBC and the CW.

Not surprisingly, three of the four networks aired reruns in at least one of those hours, though it’s doubtful they would have fared too much better even with originals. “Idol” more than quintupled the averages for ABC’s “America’s Funniest Home Videos,” CW’s “Gilmore Girls” and NBC’s “Law & Order: Criminal Intent,” all of them repeats.

CBS, whose shows skew older, was the only network to average above a 2.0 at 8 or 9 p.m., airing original episodes of “NCIS” and “The Unit.”

Of course Fox easily finished first for the night among 18-49s as the network posted an 11.6 average rating and a 30 share. CBS was second at 3.3/9, NBC third at 2.1/5, ABC fourth at 1.9/5, Univision fifth at 1.6/4 and CW sixth at 1.1/3.

At 8 p.m. Fox stated the night in the lead with a 10.7 rating for the first half of “Idol.” CBS was second that hour with a 3.6 for “NCIS,” with Univision and NBC tied for third at 1.9, Univision for “La Fea Mas Bella” and NBC for “Dateline.” ABC was fifth with a 1.6 for a repeat of “Videos” and CW sixth with a 0.8 for a “Gilmore” rerun.

Fox led again at 9 p.m., this time with a 12.5 for the second half of “Idol.” CBS was second once again that hour with a 3.3 for “Unit,” with Univision, NBC and ABC all tied for third at 1.7, Univision for “Mundo de Fieras,” NBC for a repeat of “Criminal Intent” and ABC for “Primetime.” That left CW sixth with a 1.3 for “Pussycat Dolls Present: Search for the Next Doll.”

CBS took the lead at 10 p.m. with a 2.9 for a repeat of “CSI,” with ABC and NBC tied for second at 2.5, ABC for “Boston Legal” and NBC for a repeat of “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit.” Univision was fourth with a 1.3 for “Ver para Creer.”

Among households, Fox led the night with a 17.2 average rating and a 26 share. CBS was second at 8.0/13, NBC third at 4.6/7, ABC fourth at 4.3/7, Univision fifth at 2.1/3 and CW sixth at 1.7/3.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_10939.asp

HDTVChallenged

03-21-07, 01:07 PM

Strange comments coming from a hardcore fan of the almost-never-watched GSN! :)

...

And let us be brutally honest: the CW really has no reason to exist -- other than to cheaply fill prime-time programming slots of stations which generally are owned in duopolies by major corporations.

So what would be your thoughts if "The CW" were just another "cable" option like say USANetwork or SciFi or TNT?

I only ask because in what is a relatively "neutrally biased" thread, you've displayed quite a hostile take towards "The CW," at one point even predicting that MyNetWorkTV would 'bury The CW by the end of the season.' (or words similar to that ;) ) That's just an observation ... :)

Rakesh.S

03-21-07, 01:32 PM

i'm glad abc finally scheduled traveler, but i'm afraid it's a summer burn off and nothing more..they paid for 6 or 9 episodes and had no room in the midseason schedule.

Shows that should end and go out on top next season -

Prison Break (monday's episode may have been the shark jumping episode)
Lost (testing viewer patience, has gone from top 5 to top 20)
Supernatural (love the show, but i really can't see them coming up with more arcs)
Smallville (it's time...we've been through lana angst for 6 years..let's call it a wrap)

jim tressler

03-21-07, 01:39 PM

why did prison break jump the shark on monday?? I wish they would have ended it after this year.. year 3 seems too drawn out for me.. but non the less, still a good show!

shuttermaker

03-21-07, 01:49 PM

MLB to look into iN Demand's 'Extra Innings' offer

NEW YORK -- Baseball's "Extra Innings" package of out-of-market games might wind up staying on cable television.

IN Demand said Wednesday it will offer to match the terms of DirecTV's $700 million, seven-year deal with Major League Baseball on behalf of its owners, who are affiliates of the companies that own Time Warner, Comcast and Cox cable systems.

Full article here:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2806948

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:01 PM

So what would be your thoughts if "The CW" were just another "cable" option like say USANetwork or SciFi or TNT?

I only ask because in what is a relatively "neutrally biased" thread, you've displayed quite a hostile take towards "The CW," at one point even predicting that MyNetWorkTV would 'bury The CW by the end of the season.' (or words similar to that ;) ) That's just an observation ... :)

It is certainly a fair observation. I don't think of myself as biased against the CW, but if you do, you are absolutely entitled to your opinion.

I am not hoping to see the CW fail. However, I would like to see more shows I think are imaginative and not just holdovers from the WB and UPN. Come on, if you have just a 12-hour prime-time week and you are programming wrestling for two hours along with Pussycat Dolls and ATM for a few more, you don't need a lot more hours to fill. The bar just isn't that high, and the CW hasn't even managed to come close to crossing it.

Things may get better -- it would be hard to see them getting much worse. And I hope they do. But for now, 14 months after its announced birth, the CW is certainly not living up to anyone's expectations.

And my take on MYNetworkTV was obviously very, very wrong. (From my recollection, your memory of what I said is just about perfect, sadly for me.) :) But then it, in effect, admitted its mistakes and has made a giant U-turn. Not, in my mind, a quality U-turn, but a dramatic change in direction along with aggresive new management.

You surely can';t say that about the CW. It took no chances, it always seemd to take the easy way out. Ir retained fading shows, it didn't really expand the envelope and it provided little of any substance, IMO. And nothing seems to have changed that driftless direction. There seems little sense of urgency.

If the CW were a cable option, it would immediately jump into the front tier of networks. But then it couldn't afford to produce all those shows, so who knows what would happen.

My suspicion is that if the CW were to get a really visionary leader it could do well -- or at least far better. Overall I think the strategy of going after a niche audience doesn't work for networks -- to use the old cliche, that is why it is called broadcasting. If you want the niche, do everything you can to grab a bigger audience and then move toward the niche (a la Fox).

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:11 PM

TV Sports
In Demand Plays Ball
MultiChannel News 3/21/2007

The dugout for Major League Baseball’s Extra Innings out-of-market package just got a little more crowded.

In Demand said Wednesday that it will match the terms of DirecTV’s $700 million, seven-year deal with Major League Baseball, including carriage of The Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009 to at least the same number of subscribers who will get the channel via the direct-broadcast satellite service.

The programmer added that its offer includes the use of a most-favored-nations provision in order to ensure that all terms are compatible.

Cable operators Time Warner Cable, Comcast and Cox Communications are In Demand affiliates. The service is owned by Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, Comcast In Demand Holdings and Cox Communications Holdings.

“As the current home for Extra Innings for more than 200,000 cable subscribers, we have extended ourselves to do our best to be able to continue to provide this package to baseball fans and our customers," In Demand president Robert Jacobson said in a prepared statement.

"This offer meets all of the conditions set forth by MLB last week,” he added. “Throughout this entire process, our goal has always been to respect the wishes of baseball fans who currently subscribe to Extra Innings through their local cable provider, and we stand ready to execute an agreement before the beginning of the baseball season.”

The first pitch of the 2007 MLB season is scheduled for Sunday night, April 1, when the New York Mets take on the St. Louis Cardinals on ESPN.

http://www.multichannel.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleid=CA6426516

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:16 PM

TV Sports
Cable Ready to Play Ball on Extra Innings Package
By Jon Lafayette Television Week March 21, 2007

The cable industry said it offered to meet DirecTV's terms in order to continue to carry Major League Baseball's Extra Innings out-of-market game package.

DirecTV had hoped to carry Extra Innings exclusively, but after a flurry of protest, it agreed to a two-pronged agreement with MLB, paying $100 million a year for the exclusive and about half that for a non-exclusive package.

As part of the deal, DirecTV agreed to carry a new MLB cable channel to all of its subscribers. DirecTV also will own part of the channel.

In Demand Networks, which is owned by Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox and buys pay-per-view and on-demand programming for cable, said it will pay the same terms as DirecTV for Extra Innings. It also will put the Baseball Channel in the same number of homes as DirecTV does at launch in 2009.

There may be a question about whether the same number of subscribers is the same as the same proportion of subscribers. But with Congress set to look at this and other sports issues at a hearing next week, it may be a rather esoteric point on which to turn down the cable offer, especially since it would mean the Baseball Channel would launch with a record number of subscribers.

"This offer meets all the conditions set forth by MLB last week," Robert Jacobson, president and CEO of In Demand, said in a statement Wednesday. "Throughout this entire process, our goal has always been to respect the wishes of baseball fans who currently subscribe to Extra Innings through their local cable provider, and we stand ready to execute an agreement before the beginning of the baseball season," which is April 2.

EchoStar, which also carried Extra Innings, had no comment.

Officials from Major League Baseball and DirecTV could not be reached for comment.

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11747

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:19 PM

TV Sports
In Demand Says It Will Match Offer for Baseball Package
By Ben Grossman Broadcasting & Cable 3/21/2007

In Demand Networks said Wednesday it will match DirecTV’s offer to carry Major League Baseball’s out-of-market package and yet-to-be launched Baseball Channel on "the same terms contained in the MLB and DirecTV agreement announced recently."

The provider of programming via cable outlets said it will match DirecTV’s seven-year commitment - said to be worth $700 million - and will carry the new channel "with distribution to at least the number of subscribers to which DirecTV launches the channel."

"This offer meets all the conditions set forth by MLB last week," says In Demand Networks president and CEO Robert D. Jacobson.

It is yet to be determined whether Major League Baseball will deem the offer acceptable.

DISH Network has yet to respond to MLB’s offer that all incumbents of the package have until the end of this month to match DirecTV’s terms.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6426531

dad1153

03-21-07, 02:21 PM

kjpjr

03-21-07, 02:24 PM

In Demand Networks said Wednesday it will match DirecTV’s offer to carry Major League Baseball’s out-of-market package.

As a long time subscriber to MLB EI and one who cannot have a dish -- I am so happy I could ****! I hope this all falls together!

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:33 PM

MLB is now sitting pretty atop a pile of cash (for which they don't have to pay federal taxes! :mad: ) from both Direct TV and the cable ops... for a package that sold poorly the year before with very few buyers. The people running the NFL could learn a thing or two about business savvy from MLB's suits.

But far bigger than the money MLB gets is that it will get its baseball channel on at least 30 million homes at startup (and 45 million or so if Dish signs on).

That would probably make the value of the Baseball Network some $2 billion -- or more -- at startup, and add some $70 million or so to the net value of every MLB franchise. [B]THAT[/B[ was the grand slam MLB hit, if indeed the InDemand offer is accepted. And that doesn't count the $6 million annualy in operators fees (at the reported 30 cents per month) that each MLB would receive.

But before breaking out the champagne, we should remember that the InDemand president said just two weeks ago that the DirecTV deal was cleverly constructed to InDemand could not possibly match it.

So we'll have to await the MLB reaction to the InDemand offer.

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:36 PM

According to The Associated Press "...Bob DuPuy, baseball's chief operating officer, said he would have to find out details of iN Demand's offer before commenting...."

Does it seem odd to you that InDemand would announce it agreed to the deal before contacting MLB?

Why not, if it were really going to reach agreement, wait until the agreement was in place?

CPanther95

03-21-07, 02:54 PM

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:54 PM

TV Notebook
Fox Renews Prison Break for Third Season
By A.J. Frutkin MediaWeek March 21, 20-7

Fox has picked up Prison Break for a third season. The serialized action drama ranks number one in its Monday 8 p.m. time period among adults 18-34, and men 18-49.

Created by Paul T. Scheuring, the series stars Dominic Purcell and Wentworth Miller as brothers on the run from the law, the government, and a White House conspiracy.

In its first season, the show's action focused on the brothers' attempt to break out of an Illinois prison. Now in its second season, which ends April 2, escape plans have led them to Panama.

Although plans for the third season storyline are being kept quiet, conjectures have centered on the brothers, along with several fellow escapees, landing back behind bars.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003560761

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:56 PM

The key is "same number of subs" not same percentage of carriage. This was announced in advance to the public because they know it doesn't actually meet the terms of the deal - but they want their subs to think that it does, but MLB shot them down anyway.

Unfortunately, I think I agree. And it probably was done with an eye to next week's Senate Commerce Committee hearing.

fredfa

03-21-07, 02:58 PM

For PR purposes, were I Bob Dupuy, I would immediately answer that I would accept those terms -- even though the carriage of the Baseball Channel is far inferior to what DirecTV is offering -- IF Comcast added Phillies games to MLB-EI and Cox added Padres games (both including all HD presentations, of course.)

Then the ball is back in cable's court (and the RSN exclusivity issue is front and center, where both baseball and DirecTV want it).

steverobertson

03-21-07, 03:22 PM

Saw this on DBS Talk came from ESPN http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2806948

Latest news: Bob DuPuy says offer falls short.

IN Demand's pitch to keep "Extra Innings" on cable apparently was out of Major League Baseball's strike zone.

IN Demand said Wednesday it will offer to match the terms of DirecTV's $700 million, seven-year deal with Major League Baseball on behalf its owners, who are affiliates of the companies that own Time Warner, Comcast and Cox cable systems. As part of the offer, iN Demand also said it would carry The Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009 to at least the same number of subscribers who will get the channel on DirecTV.

However, Bob DuPuy, baseball's chief operating officer, said in a statement Wednesday that iN Demand's offer wasn't adequate.

"The communication sent to our office today by iN Demand is not responsive to that offer," DuPuy said. "In spite of their public comments, the response falls short of nearly all of the material conditions (among them requirements for carriage of The Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings) set forth in the Major League Baseball offer made to them on March 9."
__________________
Coming this fall: CNN-HD, TBS-HD, FX-HD, USA-HD, TWC-HD - Stay Tuned!

fredfa

03-21-07, 03:31 PM

Thanks, steve.

CPanther95

03-21-07, 03:32 PM

Well, that didn't take very long.

dad1153

03-21-07, 03:32 PM

Does InDemand (or lawmakers like Senator Kerry) have a leg to stand on if it were to sue MLB to stop its exclusivity deal with Direct TV? Does In Demand's counter-proposal consists of only a face-saving fake so they can tell their subscribers when MLB goes exclusive with Direct TV "we tried and they (MLB) shut us down"? Is there any legal avenues for J6P to sue and try to stop the deal? With how much money is at stake its amazing to see these media titans battle to the death for what amounts to loss leaders (like the rights to NFL games) just to make their overall industry (cable, satellite) look good on a TV spot or flyer. The only one that is guaranteed to come out of this a winner is MLB (with Direct TV a potential winner too if it passes Congress scrutiny).

steverobertson

03-21-07, 03:32 PM

Well, that didn't take very long.

You were right on congratulations

fredfa

03-21-07, 03:34 PM

TV Sports
In Demand’s Extra Innings Play Whiffs at MLB
MultiChannel News 3/21/2007

Major League Baseball Wednesday rejected In Demand’s offer to match the terms of DirecTV’s $700 million, seven-year deal with the league, including carriage of The Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009 to at least the same number of subscribers who will get the channel via the direct-broadcast satellite service.

“Today Major League Baseball received communication from In Demand,” MLB president and chief operating officer Bob DuPuy said in a prepared statement. “The offer to match the terms of the agreement reached by MLB and DirecTV remains open to In Demand and Dish until the deadline of March 31, 2007. The communication sent to our office today by In Demand is not responsive to that offer.”

He added, “In spite of their public comments, the response falls short of nearly all of the material conditions (among them requirements for carriage of The Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings) set forth in the Major League Baseball offer made to them on March 9.”

In Demand president Rob Jacobson had said earlier Wednesday that the industry would match DirecTV’s price for the package -- reported to be $700 million -- as well as distribute the league’s upstart Baseball Channel to as many subscribers as DirecTV does when the network launches in 2009 through In Demand’s three owners: Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Cox Communications.

DirecTV has said that it will distribute the network to at least 15 million subscribers as part of its basic programming tier.

Jacobson added that he believes the deal matches the terms and conditions that the league outlined for the industry to secure rights to the Extra Innings package.

“What MLB has said publicly is that they’re looking for similar carriage as DirecTV,” he said. “I think I did them even one better by offering them at least the same amount of carriage as DirecTV just from [In Demand’s owners]. Nothing in any way would prohibit them from calling up Cablevision [Systems], Charter [Communications], Mediacom [Communications], EchoStar [Communications], Verizon [Communications], AT&T and securing even better distribution for the channel."

He added, “With the In Demand partners and DirecTV, it would launch in at least 30 million homes, and if they can get the other [distributors], you’re talking a number that would be the most significant launch of a cable channel in history.”

The first pitch of the 2007 MLB season is scheduled for Sunday night, April 1, when the New York Mets take on the St. Louis Cardinals on ESPN.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6426516.html?display=Breaking+News

CPanther95

03-21-07, 03:36 PM

You were right on congratulations

It only took reading the release with a heavy dose of skeptcism to spot the catch in the fine print. We already had plenty of feedback from all involved that it would be virtually impossible for InDemand to meet the terms proposed - so something had to be hinkey.

fredfa

03-21-07, 03:40 PM

Weekly Cable Nielsen Notebook
USA Gives Other Nets 'Raw' Deal
By Anthony Crupi MediaWeek MARCH 21, 2007 -

USA Network laid claim to yet another prime-time victory last week, averaging 2.59 million viewers on the strength of its Monday night stalwart, WWE Raw.

The two-hour wrestling showcase averaged 5.77 million viewers between 9 p.m. and 11 p.m, and topped the adult 18-49 and 25-54 demos, while taking first and third among adults 18-34.

In addition to delivering the largest average total viewership, USA also swept the top demos, averaging 1.21 million adults 18-49, 1.19 million adults
25-54 and 545,000 adults 18-34.

For the week ended March 18, TNT took second among ad-supported cable nets, averaging 1.78 million viewers in prime, while chalking up its best demo numbers among A25-54, where it placed second with 870,000. The Turner net finished fourth in the A18-49 category, delivering 791,000.

Third place went to TBS, which averaged 1.57 million total viewers throughout the week. The network also fared well among the demos, taking second among both A18-49 (899,000) and A18-49 (870,000), while finishing third among the 18-34 set (479,000). MTV edged TBS out for the number two spot, with 489,000.

A&E grabbed fourth place with 1.46 million viewers, while Fox News Channel edged out News Corp. sibling FX by the merest dermal-dental layer, averaging 1.45 million viewers to FX’s 1.449 million.

FX enjoyed a particularly strong week, thanks to the premiere of its latest drama series, The Riches, which lured 3.84 million viewers Monday night in the 10 p.m. time slot. The Eddie Izzard vehicle also sewed up the week’s third-largest delivery of 18-49s (2.52 million) and 25-54s (2.17 million).

Another program of note was VH1’s penultimate episode of I Love New York, which on Monday night served up 3.7 million total viewers, as well as 2.17 million adults 18-49 and 1.48 million adults 18-34.

Non-ad-supported Disney Channel was a virtual second-place finisher in prime, averaging 2.39 million viewers while winning both the kids 6-11 demo (1.01 million) and ‘tweens 9-14 (860,000). It was Disney’s 102nd consecutive week victory in the former category, and its 98th straight win among the latter.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003560683

kjpjr

03-21-07, 03:43 PM

OK so it is satellite radio but it is a start! And it seems that my excitement aobut MLB EI was short lived!

From Detroit Free Press freep.com
Sirius proposes a la carte radio programming
March 21, 2007

By JEREMY HERRON

ASSOCIATED PRESS BUSINESS WRITER

NEW YORK — Satellite radio customers will get the option to pay a lower price for just the channels they want if the industry’s two big providers are allowed to merge, Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. said today in a securities filing of its bid to buy XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc.

The statement comes as Sirius with XM seek to assuage regulatory concerns that their deal, to be paid for with stock valued at $4.7 billion when it was announced Feb. 19, will create a monopoly that would harm consumers.

The Sirius filing said the deal would generate cost savings from efficiencies that could allow the company to offer “a la carte” programming at a price below the current $12.95 per month subscription fee.

An a la carte option would allow customers to pay only for the channels they want to receive. Combined, Sirius and XM currently offer more than 300 channels of programming. But some of those stations are identical and many more feature similar formats and genres.

“Customers may elect to receive fewer channels at a monthly price lower than $12.95; substantially similar programming at the existing $12.95 price; or more channels, including some of the ’best of both’ networks, at a modest premium to the cost of one service,” Sirius said in the Securities and Exchange Commission document.

Sirius also said the combination would increase the diversity of programming by eliminating redundancy that would free space for additional channels.
The filing comes a day after Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin appeared at a Senate subcommittee hearing to face questions about the proposed deal’s effect on the competitive landscape.

During the hearing, Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., questioned Karmazin’s stance that the combined company would face competition from terrestrial radio, MP3 players and Internet radio.

“Satellite radio is a small part of a highly competitive and ever-expanding market for audio entertainment,” Sirius said today.

Kohl also voiced concern that the combined company would raise prices in the future, particularly if it signed exclusive contracts with sports leagues or popular entertainment providers. Karmazin said he was open to regulatory oversight of price increases as a condition of the merger.

Karmazin also told the panel that subscribers would be able to block programming they find offensive if the government approves the deal.

.

fredfa

03-21-07, 03:57 PM

It should be noted that Dupuy specifically said the iN Demand offer fell short in "...nearly all of the material conditions (among them requirements for carriage of The Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings) set forth in the Major League Baseball offer made to them on March 9.”

So it, at least according to MLB, isn't just the carriage agreement. It also is the money, and who knows what else. But I would assume that if, in the end cable actually matches the carriage agreement and the financial terms, it will get the package.

If Dupuy is to be believed, this was just a grand-standing measure by Jacobson. I would assume it was to take some heat off in Demand before next week's Senate Committee hearings. But now, who knows what it will do. Ut seems to me it adds more heat from disgruntled cable subs who see the sticking points as pretty minor problems.

As I've asked from the beginning of this fiasco, what is the problem with offering to carry a channel two years from now?

There isn't some one of 100+ channels which could be bumped in the next 24 months?

I still believe this is about cable taking a hard line against the NFL Network. Just imagine the uproar this fall if cable agreed to the MLB deal and still refused to carry the NFL Network.

But clearly someone isn't telling the truth. Either in Demand did agree to match the DirecTV deal, or it didn't. Jacobson says it did. DuPuy says it didn't.

I guess we will find out at the Senate hearings who is the liar.

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:03 PM

TV Notebook
ABC Announces 11 More Early Pickups for 2007-2008
(ABC News Release) March 21, 2007

ABC Television Network today announced fourteen early pick-ups for the 2007-08 season for new breakout series “Brothers & Sisters,” “Ugly Betty” and “MEN IN TREES,” as well as returning hits “The Bachelor,” “Boston Legal,” “Dancing with the Stars,” “Desperate Housewives,” “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Jimmy Kimmel Live” and “Lost.” The announcement was made by ABC Entertainment President Stephen McPherson at the March Development Meeting in Los Angeles. These series join previously announced “America’s Funniest Home Videos,” “Supernanny” and “Wife Swap,” which have also been renewed for the 2007-08 season.

“We have had a strong year, with two of the season’s breakout hits, ‘Ugly Betty’ and ‘Brothers & Sisters,’ and the solid performance of ‘MEN IN TREES,’” said McPherson. “We are pleased that viewers have invested in these new favorites along with our other returning series. These shows provide us with a substantial foundation to make 07-08 our best schedule yet.”

“Brothers & Sisters”

In this compelling drama about the Walker family, we meet a collection of intertwined and somewhat damaged adult siblings who embrace one another unconditionally while striving to reflect the perceived perfection of their role model parents. In the days ahead, they will navigate waves of temptation, deception and grief.

“Brothers & Sisters” leads its CBS drama competition (“Without a Trace”/”Cold Case”) in Sunday’s
10 o’clock hour this season among adults (18-34/18-49), and dominates its time period with each of the key women demos. The freshman drama stands as the No. 2 new series on any network in its hour this season with Adults 18-49, behind only ABC’s high-rated debut of “October Road” (3/15/07).

“Brothers & Sisters” stars Calista Flockhart as Kitty, Rachel Griffiths as Sarah, Sally Field as Nora Holden, Ron Rifkin as Saul Holden, Patricia Wettig as Holly, Balthazar Getty as Thomas, Dave Annable as Justin, Matthew Rhys as Kevin, John Pyper-Ferguson as Joe, Sarah Jane Morris as Julia, Emily VanCamp as Rebecca Harper and Kerris Lilla Dorsey as Paige.

Ken Olin, Jon Robin Baitz and Greg Berlanti are executive producers. The series is produced by ABC Television Studio.

“Ugly Betty”

The award winning drama from ABC Television Studio, based on the Columbian telenovela “Yo Soy Betty La Fea,” has become an international phenomenon. If you took a moment to get to know Betty Suarez, you’d see how sweet, intelligent and hard-working she is. But few people do, because in the world of high fashion, Betty is the oversized peg in the petite round hole.

The freshman “Ugly Betty” has established itself a competitive second to CBS’ time period veteran, “Survivor,” in Total Viewers, while ranking No. 1 with its core audience of Women 18-34. It has substantially improved the time period, representing ABC's top scripted series in the hour in 12 years.

The series stars America Ferrera as Betty Suarez, Eric Mabius as Daniel Meade, Alan Dale as Bradford Meade, Tony Plana as Ignacio, Ana Ortiz as Hilda, Ashley Jensen as Christina, Becki Newton as Amanda, Mark Indelicato as Justin, Michael Urie as Marc, Kevin Sussman as Walter, Rebecca Romijn as Alexis Meade and Vanessa Williams as Wilhelmina Slater.

Academy Award nominee and Emmy Award winner Salma Hayek is executive producer, along with Silvio Horta, Ben Silverman, Jose Tamez, James Hayman and Marco Pennette.

“MEN IN TREES”

“MEN IN TREES” looks at the relationships between men and women through the eyes of relationship coach Marin Frist, who questions her own advice and resolves to temporarily stay in Elmo, Alaska -- where the ratio of men to women is ten to one -- to get started on her new book… about men.

In its Thursday 10 o’clock time period, "MEN IN TREES" ranks second to NBC’s time period veteran, “ER,” beating CBS’ freshman “Shark” among Adults 18-34. On its most recent original airing (2/15/07), “MEN IN TREES” achieved series-high ratings among Adults 18-49 and with key women.

The series stars Anne Heche as Marin Frist, Abraham Benrubi as Ben Thomasson, Emily Bergl as Annie O’Donnell, Seana Kofoed as Jane, Suleka Mathew as Sara, Derek Richardson as Patrick Bachelor, Cynthia Stevenson as Celia Bachelor, Sarah Strange as Theresa, Lauren Tom as Mai Washington, James Tupper as Jack Slattery and John Amos as Buzz Washington.

Created by Jenny Bicks, Bicks, James Mangold and Cathy Konrad are executive producers of the series, which is filmed in Vancouver, Canada, and is from Tree Line Films, Perkins Street Productions and NS Pictures, Inc. in association with Warner Bros. Television.

“The Bachelor”

“The Bachelor” is the original primetime reality romance series that offers one lucky man and 25 lucky women the unique opportunity to find true love.

“The Bachelor: Rome” was a strong draw with younger viewers, ranking second to NBC’s “Heroes” in Adults 18-34, Women 18-34 and Teens 12-17. The franchise consistently delivers among its core audience of young women, one of the top TV series this season (No. 3).

“The Bachelor” is hosted by Chris Harrison and produced by Next Entertainment in Association with Warner Horizon Television. Mike Fleiss and Lisa Levenson are executive producers. David Bohnert is co-executive producer.

“Boston Legal”

Back-to-back Emmy Award winners James Spader and William Shatner play Alan Shore and Denny Crane, unlikely kindred spirits among the litigators at Crane Poole & Schmidt. Shirley Schmidt (five-time Emmy winner Candice Bergen), a founding partner of the firm, has been coaxed back to bring order to the office. She keeps an eye on all, particularly Denny – with whom she shares a checkered past.

“Boston Legal,” a consistent performer for ABC, generates an extremely upscale audience. The drama stands as the No. 1 TV show this season, based on the concentration of high income viewers in its young adult audience (Adult 18-49 index w/$100K+ annual income).

It stars James Spader as Alan Shore, Julie Bowen as Denise Bauer, Mark Valley as Brad Chase, Rene Auberjonois as Paul Lewiston, Constance Zimmer as Claire Simms, Gary Anthony Williams as Clarence/Clarice Bell, with Candice Bergen as Shirley Schmidt and William Shatner as Denny Crane.

Created by David E. Kelley, Kelley, Bill D’Elia and Janet Leahy are executive producers of the series, which is produced by David E. Kelley Productions in association with Twentieth Century Fox Television, and premiered October 3, 2004.

ja2bk

03-21-07, 04:11 PM

As I've asked from the beginning of this fiasco, what is the problem with offering to carry a channel two years from now?

There isn't some one of 100+ channels which could be bumped in the next 24 months?

I still believe this is about cable taking a hard line against the NFL Network. Just imagine the uproar this fall if cable agreed to the MLB deal and still refused to carry the NFL Network.

I can answer that one. Nothing is wrong if they wanted that one network to be on the digital tier. But, when you are a company trying to transition to digital and someone keeps demanding to be analog (especially a sports network), then it doesn't make sense to agree to it. Cable is trying to save bandwith so they can offer things like more HD channels and other services. Here comes a new network who is demanding to be carried analog which doesn't benefit cable in any way at all. NBA TV is carried on digital tiers. So, as long as you have a league that is okay with it, why can't the others be as well?

Negotiations are about BOTH sides getting something. So far there is NO benefit to cable in that deal.

When you go to McDonalds, they don't tell you that you can't buy pancakes without eggs. Remember who is the buyer in this.

CPanther95

03-21-07, 04:14 PM

When you go to McDonalds, they don't tell you that you can't buy pancakes without eggs. Remember who is the buyer in this.

Try to order your cable channels that way and see how they respond.

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:18 PM

I can answer that one. Nothing is wrong if they wanted that one network to be on the digital tier. But, when you are a company trying to transition to digital and someone keeps demanding to be analog (especially a sports network), then it doesn't make sense to agree to it. Cable is trying to save bandwith so they can offer things like more HD channels and other services. Here comes a new network who is demanding to be carried analog which doesn't benefit cable in any way at all. NBA TV is carried on digital tiers. So, as long as you have a league that is okay with it, why can't the others be as well?

Negotiations are about BOTH sides getting something. So far there is NO benefit to cable in that deal.

When you go to McDonalds, they don't tell you that you can't buy pancakes without eggs. Remember who is the buyer in this.

But when you buy a Value Meal you actually save a little.

Oh, and you are not forced to pay extra for chicken nuggets, a shake, apple pie, a salad, a McBurrito and the cookies when all you wanted was a Big Mac, fries and a Coke.

McDonalds certainly does remember who the buyer is. Cable clearly doesn't.

(And I don't think you have answered it: of the 100+ basic channels, there is not a single one in the next 24 months which could be moved to digital if cable really wanted to make this deal?

Do you supose that if Comcast, Time-Warner or Cox come up with a new channel they will be able to find space for it on basic?)

ja2bk

03-21-07, 04:18 PM

Try to order your cable channels that way and see how they respond.

Different argument from this one. When you first ordered cable service, that structure of the entire package was already in place. So, by ordering, you accepted those terms.

In this case, you are trying to re-negotiate something you had previously and the terms are changing. You originally got only pancakes. But, now they tell you that you can't get pancakes anymore unless you agree to buy some eggs (and they don't care if you are full.)

CPanther95

03-21-07, 04:23 PM

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:28 PM

Sure, ja2bk, but when I first got cable I had The Nashville Network and America's Talking and a host of other channels which have changed formats and even their names -- without any agreement from me. And others which have been added, at additional cost to me, which I have had no say over. It has been take it or leave it from American cable companies. (Canadian DBS seems to do quite well with a vastly streamlined tier which offers far more choice and far more savings.)

Cable has not renogitated -- it hasn't had to. Until DBS it has a total monopoly. Now, with a strong DBS sector and telcos rapidly joining the fray, the monopoly is going away, and quickly.

So what is the harm is simply passing legislation forbidding cable carriage demands (inccluding MLB's) to be part of any agreement between networks and providers?

That would allow a la carte, which simply by the behind-doors, closed-to-the-public negoitations between cable/satellite/and telco with their networks they cannot allow now.

If a la carte were allowed, and it is such a disaster. surely Colmcast and friends would be able to convince subscribers of that. If not, I am sure someone, whether it be Charlie Ergen, John Malone, or someone else, would offer a pure a la carte play at substantial savings to the average home which watches some 15 channels a month.

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:31 PM

And for students of cable/DBS history, as has been mentioned before:

When Dish and DirecTV tried to get carriage of InHD (also owned by TWC, Comcast and Cox) it was told it had to do so on the same terms as the cable companies: that is, pay a set fee for each digital dubscriber.

At the time cable had about a 10% digital pentration while the DBS companies, of course, were 100% digital.

Funny how when the same deal, in effect, is offered back to those very same companies they scream so loudly.

Karma. It is simply karma.

CPanther95

03-21-07, 04:36 PM

It isn't even as bad as the INHD deal, because in this case, D* is actually offering the channel to 100% of subs and cable is forced to match that. They aren't required to do any more.

If D* wanted to really be pr*cks, they'd draft the deal so that it guaranteed 90% carriage and analog delivery costs 3 times as much as digital delivery.

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:40 PM

TV Notebook
ABC Renews “Ugly Betty”, “Grey's Anatomy”, and “Lost” for '07-'08
Marc Berman Media Week March 21, 2007

ABC has announced that 10 more early series pick-ups for the 2007-08 season will join the previously announced America’s Funniest Home Videos, Supernanny and Wife Swap. In addition to renewals for freshman entries Ugly Betty, Brothers & Sisters and Men In Trees are The Bachelor, Boston Legal, Dancing With the Stars, Desperate Housewives, Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, Grey’s Anatomy and Lost.

The network has also confirmed that late night Jimmy Kimmel Live will be back. Notably missing are any half-hour scripted comedies.

“We have had a strong year, with two of the season’s breakout hits, Ugly Betty and Brothers & Sisters and the solid performance of Men In Trees,” said ABC Entertainment President Stephen McPherson. “We are pleased that viewers have invested in these new favorites along with our other returning series. These shows provide us with a substantial foundation to make 2007-08 our best schedule yet.”

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003561155

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:41 PM

James Hibberd of Television Week notes in his story on the ABC pickups "....Absent from the list was Monday night underperformer "What About Brian," which is in its second season. "Brian" has averaged a 2.6 rating among adults 18 to 49 this season. Also absent were freshman midseason comedies "In Case of Emergency" and "Knights of Prosperity," though an ABC rep cautioned against reading too much into absences from the list...."

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11750

fredfa

03-21-07, 04:47 PM

A reminder -- after today's “Prison Break” and ABC renewal announcements: you can always find an updated, current list of all renewed (and cancelled) prime-time shows in the third post of the thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=4267598&&#post4267598

fredfa

03-21-07, 05:17 PM

TV Sports
More MLB-EI Details
By Eric Fisher and John Ourand in Sports Business Daily’s “Closing Bell”

“…The dispute centers on two areas. DirecTV has agreed to place MLB’s new channel in 80% of its homes, according to a letter MLB President & COO Bob DuPuy sent to the FCC on Wednesday.

For a deal to happen, MLB is demanding that InDemand commit to make the channel available in 80% of cable's digital basic homes, which is about 40% of the overall subscriber base. Additionally, MLB is balking at InDemand's offer to pay for Extra Innings on an actual sub basis, rather than an upfront guarantee.

‘[They] will need to commit to a fair allocation of the total rights fees for Extra Innings, ... based on the number of digital households that they and DirecTV serve,’ MLB said in its FCC filing.

InDemand countered that it was willing to guarantee a license fee structure based on the aggregate number of Extra Innings subscribers it has. "This is not the proposal of a company that has sour grapes," said InDemand's Rob Jacobson. ‘This is the proposal of a company that wants to be a partner.’…”

ja2bk

03-21-07, 05:18 PM

Networks demanding carriage on a basic tier is not a different argument, and is nothing new. The fact that MLBTV is not popular enough to get the cablecos to agree to it is the only difference.

The analog/digital point you bring up doesn't apply here. MLB is only concerned about the percentage of subs who have access. If a cableco wants to completely transition to digital, they can do so - they just need to put MLB in the basic package.

Just so you all know, I'm not on one side or the other in this, but I am taking an outside view.

I think you forget that the basic package is analog. Until everyone has a tv with a digital tuner in it, any basic package by default is analog. This means the cable co would have to eat up a lot of bandwith that could be used for other nets (HD ones even.)

I understand that MLB wants the widest audience possible. That is the name of the game of any network of course.

But, the flip side is "what makes this deal appealing to the other side?" This is the basic question in any deal. The other side at least has to get the impression they are getting something out of it. My analogy probably wasn't the best with McDs. But, tell me where this deal benefits the cable company?

fredfa

03-21-07, 05:24 PM

Anyhow, according to the "Sports Business Daily" article I just excerpted, the issue is not analog basic subs at all -- it is digital basic subs. And that makes cable's position even less understandable to me.

(And for the record, SBJ has been out in front on this story from day one -- they broke it back in January.)

fredfa

03-21-07, 05:32 PM

Just so you all know, I'm not on one side or the other in this, but I am taking an outside view....But, the flip side is "what makes this deal appealing to the other side?" This is the basic question in any deal. The other side at least has to get the impression they are getting something out of it. My analogy probably wasn't the best with McDs. But, tell me where this deal benefits the cable company?

I appreciate your views. You spell them out clearly and concisely and without rancor.
We all appreciate that kind of honest and hard-fought discussion here.

What is in it for cable is to not lose another foothold to DirecTV, which is clearly positioning itself to be THE place to go for sports fans. They tend to spend lots more than an average home and will pay almost any price for their games.

Chase Carey (and incoming DirecTV owner John Malone) has stated in no uncertain terms that DirecTV intends to do everything it can to corner the sports market.

There were only 230,000 cable MLB-EI subs last year. But if even 20% of them were persuaded to switch to DirecTV this year thsat would be a fairly major hit.

And next year, when DirecTV says it will provide nearly all MLB-EI games in HD, and when there will be 15 million or so more HD households available, the problem will escalate.

So,to sum up, what is in it for cable is to not be shut out of the out-of-market MLB game for the next seven years.

And all it has to do is match the financial and carriage agreement DirecTV has. Not beat it. Match it.

A kicker in all of this is the $$$ figure.

Both MLB and DirecTV have said that if cable gets a share of the package, then the DirecTV payment will fall by a sizable amount. What isn't clear is if DirecTV is paying a sumn based on all subs, or just a set sum. And if that sum would be, say $500 million (for seven years) is that based on its 16 million subs? So would cable have to come up with $1.5 Billion to cover its close to 50 million subs? Or would in Demand's partners just need to match the $500,000?

ja2bk

03-21-07, 05:38 PM

I appreciate your views. You spell them out clearly and concisely and without rancor.
We all appreciate that kind of honest and hard-fought discussion here.

What is in it for cable is to not lose another foothold to DirecTV, which is clearly positioning itself to be THE place to go for sports fans. They tend to spend lots more than an average home and will pay almost any price for their games.

Chase Carey (and incoming DirecTV owner John Malone) has stated in no uncertain terms that DirecTV intends to do everything it can to corner the sports market.

There were only 230,000 cable MLB-EI subs last year. But if even 20% of them were persuaded to switch to DirecTV this year thsat would be a fairly major hit.

And next year, when DirecTV says it will provide nearly all MLB-EI games in HD, and when there will be 15 million or so more HD households available, the problem will escalate.

So,to sum up, what is in it for cable is to not be shut out of the out-of-market MLB game for the next seven years.

And all it has to do is match the financial and carriage agreement DirecTV has. Not beat it. Match it.

A kicker in all of this is the $$$ figure.

Both MLB and DirecTV have said that if cable gets a share of the package, then the DirecTV payment will fall by a sizable amount. What isn't clear is if DirecTV is paying a sumn based on all subs, or just a set sum. And if that sum would be, say $500 million (for seven years) is that based on its 16 million subs? So would cable have to come up with $1.5 Billion to cover its close to 50 million subs? Or would in Demand's partners just need to match the $500,000?

I thank you for the response. I guess the thing I look back to is the fact NBA TV is on digital and didn't seem interested in being carried on the analog tier (or if they did, they didn't fight too hard for it.)

I think the next question to add to your point is what will they expect to paid per sub for the Baseball Channel (not liking that name.)

fredfa

03-21-07, 05:49 PM

Apparently it is about 30 cents per sub. At least that is what has been reported.

One problem we are all having is that we are discussing a topic with some passion but without knowing the details.

(The 80% of digital subs, reported by Sports Business Daily, for example, is a far cry from all basic cable subs.)

By the way, at a major sports business conference today, the NBA had some comments on its digital tier deal. I'll try to dig those comments up.

fredfa

03-21-07, 05:55 PM

fredfa

03-21-07, 06:00 PM

Sorry I missed it, but yesterday marked 700 days until the digital conversion date of February 18, 2009

fredfa

03-21-07, 06:38 PM

TV Sports
MLB: iN Demand's proposal falls short
(MLB.com)

Major League Baseball on Wednesday declined an overture by iN Demand to carry the MLB Extra Innings out-of-market television package, saying that it did not match the conditions of a deal signed earlier this month with DirecTV.

"Today Major League Baseball received communication from iN Demand," MLB president and chief operating officer Bob DuPuy said in a statement. "The offer to match the terms of the agreement reached by MLB and DirecTV remains open to iN Demand and DISH until the deadline of March 31, 2007. The communication sent to our office today by In Demand is not responsive to that offer."

iN Demand, a provider of pay-per-view and subscription services jointly owned by cable outlets Time Warner, Comcast and Cox Communications, said Wednesday it would match the terms of DirecTV's reported seven-year, $700 million deal. As part of the offer, iN Demand also said it would carry The Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009 to at least the same number of subscribers who will get the channel on DirecTV.

"In spite of their public comments, the response falls short of nearly all of the material conditions (among them requirements for carriage of The Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings) set forth in the Major League Baseball offer made to them on March 9," DuPuy said.

The DirecTV agreement gives the satellite-television provider exclusive television rights to the Extra Innings package unless another entity matches all of the conditions of the agreement by month's end. The deal calls for the Baseball Channel to be made available to all of its customers; iN Demand's offer, however, limited that number to match only that of DirecTV's customers.

"As the current home for Extra Innings for more than 200,000 cable subscribers, we have extended ourselves to do our best to be able to continue to provide this package to baseball fans and our customers," iN Demand president Robert Jacobson said earlier in a report by The Associated Press.

(This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.)

http://mlb.mlb.com/content/printer_friendly/mlb/y2007/m03/d21/c1853091.jsp

fredfa

03-21-07, 06:42 PM

Critic’s Notebook
Good to go:
“Prison Break” gets a third season
By Ed Bark former Dallas Morning News TV critic at his website unclebarky.com

Fox's Prison Break will be back for a third season, the network announced Wednesday.

It's becoming clearer that the series also will be back in North Texas for most of the filming.

Executive producer Paul T. Scheuring tells tvguide.com, "We'll still be based out of Dallas, with the occasional satellite crew in Florida and Louisiana."

Prison Break publicist Chris Alexander later said in an email, "The production will continue to call Dallas its home. However, we will be doing some shooting over the season in Florida and Louisiana."

In January on the TV Critics Association's midseason "press tour," Fox entertainment president Peter Liguori told unclebarky.com that a third season of PB is "very unlikely to be in Dallas, but we might shoot some stuff in Dallas."

Fox later clarified Liguori's statement, with Dallas-based producer Garry Brown saying, "We don't have any immediate plans to go to a different area for most of Season 3."

The escapist drama, starring Wentworth Miller and Dominic Purcell, has performed well in the national Nielsen ratings, but relatively poorly with D-FW viewers despite originating entirely from North Texas in its second season.

Monday's episode had a 1.9 Nielsen rating with advertiser-craved 18-to-49-year-olds, finishing fourth from 7 to 8 p.m. in D-FW. Nationally, PB had a 3.4 rating in that audience demo, placing third.

PB's second season finale is on Monday, April 2.

http://www.unclebarky.com/abovethefold.html

kizzo

03-21-07, 07:03 PM

VisionOn

03-21-07, 07:03 PM

Critic’s Notebook
Good to go:
“Prison Break” gets a third season
By Ed Bark former Dallas Morning News TV critic at his website unclebarky.com

Fox's Prison Break will be back for a third season, the network announced Wednesday.

I really liked the first season and think the second is okay, but I'm not ready for this to be dragged out for another season. I just want them to end it now. They've already dragged the plotlines wafer thin, the conspiracy evidence has unravelled to the point were there's nothing left and at the rate they've killed off characters they don't have many places to go that we haven't already seen.

How long can you watch someone just run from one place to the next, get almost captured, then run away again? It's not as if they are playing The Fugitive angle and making each week self contained.

fredfa

03-21-07, 07:16 PM

I'm hopefully moving to the North Dallas area soon(I have to fly out for an interview in Dallas next week) so hopefully if I get the job I will see some of the "stars" in the area...

good luck, kizzo -- let us know how it all works out. :)

fredfa

03-21-07, 07:39 PM

TV Sports
iN Demand and MLB Continue Public Battle
By Ben Grossman Broadcasting & Cable 3/21/2007

Major League Baseball and iN Demand Networks traded public shots Wednesday after MLB on Wednesday said iN Demand’s offer for the out-of-market baseball package was insufficient.

In Demand president & CEO Robert Jacobson fired the latest salvo after MLB let In Demand’s latest offer sail by.

“By rejecting this matching offer, MLB has proven it never intended for iN DEMAND to have a fair and equal opportunity to bid for Extra Innings. We, like many, many others, question MLB’s commitment to its fans by limiting distribution of both Extra Innings and The Baseball Channel. We have offered to carry The Baseball Channel to the same number of subscribers as DirecTV and have offered the same compensation to MLB as DirectTV. Our offer was fully responsive to MLB's requirements and public statements.”

Earlier in the day, MLB chief operating officer Bob DuPuy had issued a statement turning down the In Demand offer.

"Today Major League Baseball received communication from iN Demand. The offer to match the terms of the agreement reached by MLB and DIRECTV remains open to iN Demand and Dish until the deadline of March 31, 2007. The communication sent to our office today by iN Demand is not responsive to that offer. In spite of their public comments, the response falls short of nearly all of the material conditions (among them requirements for carriage of The Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings) set forth in the Major League Baseball offer made to them on March 9."

The day began with iN Demand Networks saying it will match DirecTV’s offer to carry Major League Baseball’s out-of-market package and yet-to-be launched Baseball Channel on "the same terms contained in the MLB and DirecTV agreement announced recently."

The provider of programming via cable outlets said it will match DirecTV’s seven-year commitment - said to be worth $700 million - and will carry the new channel "with distribution to at least the number of subscribers to which DirecTV launches the channel."

"This offer meets all the conditions set forth by MLB last week," Jacobson said originally.

DISH Network has ’yet to respond to MLBs offer

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6426590

fredfa

03-21-07, 07:46 PM

Assuming this report is correct it becomes very clear that today's events were just a PR stunt by iN Demand.

DirecTV has 16 millions subscribers. The iN Demand tri of TWC, Comcast and Cox have close to 50 million subs.

Therefore, for iNDemand to say it would offer to carry the Basebal Channel to as many subscrivers as Directv, means it would only provbide one third as many of its base subs as DirecTV.

And if it would matched "the same the financial terms" as DirecTV means it would pay about one-third as much per subscriber.

That, of course, is if you can believe anything anyone says about this. Earlier in the day Robert Jacobson said: "This offer meets all the conditions set forth by MLB last week."

Apparently that wasn't true. Or else MLB is lying. As I have said before, obviously someone is.

But next week, before the Senate Commerce Committee, Dupuy and Jacobson and others will be under oath. That should be fun.

haubrija

03-21-07, 07:57 PM

Hi fellas... Big fan of this thread... Been looking for this news all day so I thought I'd post it.

Sci Fi Extends 'Battlestar'
By James Hibberd
Sci Fi Channel has increased its fourth season order of "Battlestar Galactica" to 22 episodes.

The order will include a special two-hour "Battlestar" event to air during the fourth quarter of 2007 on Sci Fi, and will also be released on DVD.

Previously, the network announced a reduced "Battlestar" season order of 13 episodes rather than 22. Combined with a slight ratings erosion during the show's current third season, fans worried Sci Fi might cancel the Peabody Award-winning show.

The fourth season will premiere in early 2008. "Battlestar" is executive produced by Ronald D. Moore and David Eick.

Source: http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11755

FYI Previous reports were that if the order was increased to 22, this would be its final season.

fredfa

03-21-07, 08:14 PM

Thanks, haubrija, and welcome to the thread -- feel free to post often.

By the way, have you been switched from Comcast to TWC...and if so, how has it gone?

CPanther95

03-21-07, 08:21 PM

But, the flip side is "what makes this deal appealing to the other side?" This is the basic question in any deal. The other side at least has to get the impression they are getting something out of it. My analogy probably wasn't the best with McDs. But, tell me where this deal benefits the cable company?

Personally, I think the price far outweighs the value. I also think D* is overpaying, but has a "whole is greater than the sum of its parts" approach to exclusive sports programming.

But it's important to remember that MLB isn't really approaching the cablecos with the intent of offering a win-win deal that makes both sides happy. They've made their deal with D* and the rest is just posturing.

ja2bk

03-21-07, 08:25 PM

ja2bk:

(from Sports Business Daily)

Adam Silver, deputy commissioner and COO, NBA, speaking today about NBA TV on a sports tier, said, “We embraced the sports tier, but we subsequently became disappointed with the amount of support cable operators have given to the sports tiers.

But eventually [the issue] will become irrelevant, and it will come down to what they pay us.”

Sir,

I thank you for the level-headed responses. I think they didn't realize they set the tone for future sports league networks and cable carriage. At the time, I think they saw anything as an improvement on being an online only network. Well we will all have to sit back and see how this plays out.

ja2bk

03-21-07, 08:30 PM

Personally, I think the price far outweighs the value. I also think D* is overpaying, but has a "whole is greater than the sum of its parts" approach to exclusive sports programming.

But it's important to remember that MLB isn't really approaching the cablecos with the intent of offering a win-win deal that makes both sides happy. They've made their deal with D* and the rest is just posturing.

That is kind of my point. Who would agree to a deal that gives them the short end of the stick? Of course it happens, but they don't know they got that end until the deal is done. :)

DevOne

03-21-07, 08:32 PM

Letterman Regular 'Bud' Melman Dies

Mar 21, 8:03 PM (ET)

By LARRY McSHANE

NEW YORK (AP) - Calvert DeForest, the white-haired, bespectacled nebbish who gained cult status as the oddball Larry "Bud" Melman on David Letterman's late night television shows, has died after a long illness. The Brooklyn-born DeForest, who was 85, died Monday at a hospital on Long Island, Letterman's "Late Show" announced Wednesday.

He made dozens of appearances on Letterman's shows from 1982 through 2002, handling a variety of twisted duties: dueting with Sonny Bono on "I Got You, Babe," doing a Mary Tyler Moore impression during a visit to Minneapolis, handing out hot towels to arrivals at the Port Authority Bus Terminal.

"Everyone always wondered if Calvert was an actor playing a character, but in reality he was just himself - a genuine, modest and nice man," Letterman said in a statement. "To our staff and to our viewers, he was a beloved and valued part of our show, and we will miss him."

The gnomish DeForest was working as a file clerk at a drug rehabilitation center when show producers, who had seen him in a New York University student's film, came calling.

He was the first face to greet viewers when Letterman's NBC show debuted on Feb. 1, 1982, offering a parody of the prologue to the Boris Karloff film "Frankenstein."

"It was the greatest thing that had happened in my life," he once said of his first Letterman appearance.

DeForest, given the nom de tube of Melman, became a program regular. The collaboration continued when the talk show host launched "Late Show with David Letterman" on CBS in 1993, though DeForest had to use his real name because of a dispute with NBC over "intellectual property."

Cue cards were often DeForest's television kryptonite, and his character inevitably appeared in an ill-fitting black suit behind thick black-rimmed glasses.

DeForest often drew laughs by his bizarre juxtaposition as a "Late Show" correspondent at events such as the 1994 Winter Olympics in Norway or the anniversary Woodstock concert that year.

His last appearance on "Late Show," celebrating his 81st birthday, came in 2002.

DeForest also appeared in an assortment of other television shows and films, including "Nothing Lasts Forever" with Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd.

At his request, there will be no funeral service for DeForest, who left no survivors.

DevOne

03-21-07, 08:41 PM

No word if a seance with 1-800-Collect, will save you up to 44%...

dad1153

03-21-07, 09:49 PM

But next week, before the Senate Commerce Committee, Dupuy and Jacobson and others will be under oath. That should be fun.

C-Span or ESPN? :D

rebkell

03-21-07, 09:53 PM

Hi fellas... Big fan of this thread... Been looking for this news all day so I thought I'd post it.

Sci Fi Extends 'Battlestar'
By James Hibberd
Sci Fi Channel has increased its fourth season order of "Battlestar Galactica" to 22 episodes.

The fourth season will premiere in early 2008. "Battlestar" is executive produced by Ronald D. Moore and David Eick.

Source: http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=11755

FYI Previous reports were that if the order was increased to 22, this would be its final season.

I'm glad to see we're going to get another full season, also good to see Men In Trees getting renewed, all in all a pretty good day for my TV viewing future.

fredfa

03-21-07, 10:19 PM

C-Span or ESPN? :D

Maybe both!

fredfa

03-21-07, 11:47 PM

TV Notebook
NBC on more solid ground
Reilly readies for the nation's top media buyers
By Michael Schneider Variety

As he meets with the nation's top media buyers this (Thursday) morning, NBC Entertainment prexy Kevin Reilly is in for a different reception than the one he got a year ago.

The buyers -- in town this week for the annual flurry of network development presentations -- were still questioning the possibility of an NBC ratings recovery last year, when Reilly gave them the first glimpse at shows such as "Heroes" and "Friday Night Lights."

"The advertisers last year looked at us as really sucking wind," Reilly said. "I think they went in with not much evidence that we knew what we were doing."

But Reilly said the network was starting to feel a bit of "a perceptual turnaround."

"I came out of the meeting with the first indication that they gave us credit for showing some life, that NBC was back in the game," he said.

Jump ahead a year: "Heroes" turned into the year's top-rated frosh scripted series, while "Friday Night Lights" and "30 Rock" earned some of the year's highest critical praise. More recently, Reilly renewed his contract at the net, providing some stability in the top programming chair.

Add that to the premiere of "Sunday Night Football" and the strength of returnees such as "Deal or No Deal" and "The Office," and Reilly will have a few more things to brag about as media buyers snack on muffins on the "Deal or No Deal" set in Culver City.

"NBC had a bit of a breakout year," said PHD U.S. managing director John Swift. "The key thing we're looking for them in year two of the rebuilding process is that they're continuing to take chances. NBC last year put a lot of thought into their development and a lot of strategy and they brought a lot of pieces that could be built into their slate."

The Peacock still has a long way to go -- the network is still in fourth place, after all -- and Reilly said he's realistic about NBC's slow rebuild.

"In the fall we were strong, but it's been a tougher second half, in part because of events like the Oscars, the Super Bowl and 'American Idol,'" he said. "We're going to need more pieces to sustain it through the whole season. It feels like we're a cycle away from those pieces."

Reilly now needs to show media buyers that this season's successes weren't flukes -- and that NBC will begin to see better ratings points to match its critical notices.

"Going into last year, it felt like a blank canvas," Reilly said. "So much so that we had to reset the entire schedule. It was really an unknown what our Thursday night would be comprised of. We really had very few tentpoles to hold on to."

This year, Reilly knew to develop shows that might be compatible with fare like "Heroes" or its growing stable of single-camera comedies. The net also knows it has a Sunday platform to promote a certain audience out of. The Peacock has also made clear that it has a mandate to air low-cost, mostly unscripted fare in the 8 p.m. hour.

"We're starting to get some pockets here where we can work a little bit around," he said.

With much left to be filmed, projects already getting early buzz include the femme drama "Lipstick Jungle," based on the Candace Bushnell novel, and the new take on "The Bionic Woman," while early talk on the comedy side includes the quirky alien-themed "Area 57."

Several projects boast female leads, which Reilly said was intentional.

"We tried to broaden out in female appeal this year," he said. "Women do control the dial and have been at the core of ABC's success."

On the comedy side, whether intentionally or not, most of the projects revolve around work or an office setting (a la "The Office"), such as "Area 57," "Business Class," "The IT Crowd" and "Wildlife."

Given its 8 p.m. mandate, Peacock is also aggressively pursuing additional nonscripted fare -- "We're going to up our reality commitment," Reilly said.

Thursday's presentation to media buyers will also include an update on the network's new-media initiatives.

As for the net's overall performance, Reilly continues to make use of Grant Tinker's famous quote, "First be best, then be first."

"The advertisers have acknowledged that they like what we're up to, but that we've got a long way to go," he said. "But no one's saying, 'We don't know what you're doing,' or 'We don't believe in what you're doing.' There's more receptivity there. I feel like I'm no longer on the hot seat, that we got through the first round of auditions."

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_story&articleid=VR1117961597&categoryid=14

fredfa

03-21-07, 11:51 PM

TV Sports
iN Demand Swings at MLB-EI Pitch
Baseball: “Strike Two!”
By Paul J. Gough The Hollywood Reporter March 22, 2007

NEW YORK -- Major League Baseball has called the cable industry out on strikes, saying an offer Wednesday to carry the Extra Innings premium package of out-of-market games falls short of terms MLB set two weeks ago.

MLB and DirecTV announced a multiyear agreement March 8 for the Extra Innings subscription package that also guarantees basic-tier carriage of the Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009. EchoStar and In Demand were told they had until March 31 to decide whether they wanted to match that deal to be allowed to continue to offer the games to their subscribers.

On Wednesday, In Demand -- the VOD proxy for cable companies Comcast Corp., Time Warner Cable and Cox Communications -- said it would accept the offer "at consistent rates and carriage requirements, which the league had agreed to with DirecTV." In Demand also said it wanted a "most favored nation" provision to determine comparability.

However, MLB president and COO Bob DuPuy said that In Demand whiffed.

"In spite of their public comments, the response falls short of nearly all of the material conditions, among them requirements for carriage of the Baseball Channel and their share of the rights fees for Extra Innings," DuPuy said.

Carriage of the Baseball Channel would equal the distribution "to at least the number of subscribers to which DirecTV launches the channel," In Demand said. DirecTV committed to launching the channel on 15 million households in 2009.

In a filing with the FCC's Media Bureau on Wednesday, MLB provided more detail about its agreement with DirecTV and what In Demand and EchoStar would have to do to match the terms of that deal. MLB has been under inquiry about the deal and will meet with FCC and lawmakers next week to answer questions.

MLB in its filing said DirecTV has agreed to offer the MLB Channel to 80% of its subscriber base and that EchoStar would have to do the same. In Demand MSOs would only need to commit to a package that includes 80% of its digital subscribers, which works out to 40% of its residential subscribers.

Late Wednesday, In Demand said its response was fully responsive to MLB's offer.

"By rejecting this matching offer, MLB has proved it never intended for In Demand to have a fair and equal opportunity to bid for Extra Innings," the company said in a statement. "We, like many, many others, question MLB's commitment to its fans by limiting distribution of both Extra Innings and the Baseball Channel."

EchoStar wasn't available for comment.

It now appears that the Extra Innings package will be a DirecTV exclusive. DirecTV's Chase Carey said the satellite company had no problem with carrying Extra Innings even if it weren't exclusive, though that would affect some of the enhancements being designed. It also goes without saying that DirecTV would pay MLB less without exclusivity.

Before Wednesday's announcement, MLB's top TV negotiator talked tough at a Manhattan gathering of sports executives.

"What you have here is a big load of sour grapes ... from bidders who participated in a full, fair, equitable and arms-length negotiation, and they lost. They failed to step up to the plate," MLB executive vp Tim Brosnan said during a panel discussion at the World Congress of Sports.

Brosnan said the negotiations were fair and that EchoStar and In Demand were given one more chance to meet the DirecTV offer and stay in the game. But Brosnan said DirecTV's offer of enhancements -- similar to those for NFL Sunday Ticket and NASCAR Hotpass, also exclusive deals for DirecTV -- gave the satellite broadcaster a leg up.

"The avid (fans) demand more than just replays of games," Brosnan said.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3ie291fc1eb5ee48aebc5b540b5397f1bc

dad1153

03-21-07, 11:57 PM

Letterman Regular 'Bud' Melman Dies

Mar 21, 8:03 PM (ET)

NEW YORK (AP) - Calvert DeForest, the white-haired, bespectacled nebbish who gained cult status as the oddball Larry "Bud" Melman on David Letterman's late night television shows, has died after a long illness. The Brooklyn-born DeForest, who was 85, died Monday at a hospital on Long Island, Letterman's "Late Show" announced Wednesday.

At his request, there will be no funeral service for DeForest, who left no survivors.

:( :( :( (sob)!

fredfa

03-22-07, 12:44 AM

TV Sports
MLB, IN Demand Remain Vague About Rights Dispute
In FCC Filing, MLB Mentions Comcast’s Exclusive Philadelphia RSN
By John Consoli MediaWeek

Major League Baseball president and COO Bob DuPuy said today that IN Demand’s offer to match DirecTV’s $700 million, seven-year carriage rights deal, is “not responsive” to the terms set forth by MLB to allow it to match, adding that the offer “fails short of all the material conditions.”

But IN Demand president Robert Jacobson disagreed, stating, “Our offer was fully responsive to Major League Baseball’s requirements and public statements.”

Both sides were vague as to what the points within the deal were matched or not matched specifically, but sources familiar with the situation said that while In Demand offered to match the dollar amount to carry the MLB Extra Innings package of out-of-market games and to launch the MLB Channel, the disagreement is over how the MLB Channel will be carried or distributed.

Through the deal with DirecTV, MLB Channel will be offered on Total Choice, its basic tier. Total Choice on DirecTV reaches over 15 million households in the U.S., and In Demand offered to carry MLB Channel in a similar amount of homes, but all those households would not necessarily be on basic tiers.

In Demand is a partnership between cable operators Time Warner, Comcast and Cox.

“By rejecting the matching offer, MLB has proven it never intended for In Demand to have a fair and equal opportunity to bid for Extra Innings,” Jacobson said in a statement. But a MLB source said, “IN Demand’s offer had to be identical to the terms of the DirecTV deal and it wasn’t.”

The disagreement took place on the same day that MLB sent a 10-page letter to the Federal Communications Commission, providing it with information about its deal with DirecTV, which had been requested by the FCC.

The letter, from DuPuy, states, “We remain hopeful that EchoStar and IN Demand will capitalize on the opportunity” to match the DirecTV deal. DuPuy adds that if those two parties do not make matching offers, “our agreement with DirecTV is fully consistent with the policies adopted by both Congress and the Commission.”

The letter says the while MLB is being taken to task for doing a possible exclusive deal with DirecTV for the Extra Innings package should no one else match, cable operators have done this for sports programming in the past and “Congress has not taken any action to prohibit such contracts.”

The letter cites Comcast doing exclusive cable-only deals for Comcast SportsNet in Philadelphia, which carries Philadelphia Flyers and Philadelphia 76ers games, both owned by Comcast.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003561294

fredfa

03-22-07, 12:48 AM

TV Notebook
HBO: After “Sopranos,” a Need for a Hit
By Bill Carter The New York Times March 22, 2007

With a last burst of episodes starting April 8, “The Sopranos,” will exit the television arena for the final time, leaving millions of fans without their all-time favorite series, and a network, HBO, without its Hall of Fame performer.

In its eight-year run on HBO, “The Sopranos” has set all sorts of new standards for cable television, collecting scores of awards, amassing record-setting audiences and providing perhaps the most precious commodity of all to HBO: cultural impact.

But after the last nine episodes starting April 8, HBO, a unit of Time Warner, will have to carry on without its signature show. Chris Albrecht, the premium cable channel’s chief executive, has been preparing for this denouement for many months. He portrayed the close of “The Sopranos” as, in a way, the completion of the first movement of a long-term artistic venture.

“It sort of cuts both ways,” Mr. Albrecht said in an interview at HBO’s Manhattan headquarters. “On the one hand, we’ll never have anything like that experience again, because between ‘The Sopranos’ and ‘Sex and the City’ and ‘Six Feet Under’ all happening in that short period of time, we came of age in a way we hadn’t before.”

But Mr. Albrecht also said he believed that “the end of ‘The Sopranos’ is really the beginning of something else.”

That something else is going to consist of a months-long splash of new and returning programs, an additional hour of Sunday night shows, an expansion into other days of the week with original series, and an array of high-profile and high-cost special projects.

“We’re going to have more new programs than we have ever had before,” Mr. Albrecht said.

But will any of them be a “Sopranos”? No one at HBO would ever predict that, because no one knew what the channel had in “The Sopranos” before it made its debut. HBO faces a risk, not only because it may disappoint HBO subscribers if no new show measures up to that standard, but also because some other channels have been developing the kind of talked-about shows that HBO has become known for.

Earlier this month, for example, the FX channel — which has styled itself for years as the HBO of basic cable because of successful shows like “Nip/Tuck”— won critical praise for a new series called “The Riches,” about a contemporary family of Gypsies. Some critics wondered if this was the kind of show that would have landed on HBO in an earlier time.

Showtime, the most direct competitor to HBO, has also tried to emulate its far more successful rival by adding more ambitious series, like the suburban comedy “Weeds” and the dramas “Sleeper Cell” and “Brotherhood.” Next month it will introduce an expensive costume epic, “The Tudors,” with Jonathan Rhys-Meyers playing a young and sexy Henry VIII.

None of these channels, though, has yet produced anything close to “The Sopranos” or any other of HBO’s celebrated series. Mr. Albrecht points out that the breadth of the channel’s offering, not “Sopranos” alone, has driven HBO to its current high of 30 million subscribers.

“We are in a unique business,” Mr. Albrecht said, one that has never been dependent on sheer audience size because as a pay-cable channel it is mainly about satisfying customers.

Michael Nathanson, a media analyst for Sanford C. Bernstein, said Mr. Albrecht’s confidence about the channel’s future is probably well placed. He said HBO has been adept at taking advantage of the expanding ways to get programs to viewers, especially through services like video-on-demand.

HBO has taken advantage of that technology, which allows viewers to watch HBO’s shows whenever they want, better than anyone else in the television business, Mr. Nathanson said.

“If you look at it in the traditional way,” Mr. Nathanson said, “you might say HBO should be worried because it might lose viewers if its doesn’t have another ‘Sopranos.’ But its subscriber base keeps growing, and I think it’s because of how well they are doing with video-on-demand.” Mr. Albrecht said HBO was promising its customers the channel would deliver “the goods,” which he defined as “something you can’t get anywhere else.”

In that category, he includes “John From Cincinnati,” a drama that combines the zen of the surfing culture with doses of philosophy, quantum physics and dysfunctional family life. And a visit from what may be an extraterrestrial.

Though that does not sound like a genre that would have built-in appeal — like, say, gangster stories — “John” has been fast-tracked, moving into production quicker than anything HBO has done. It is also getting a blessed push-off on June 10 at 10 p.m. immediately after the final scene of “The Sopranos.”

“John” will emerge as a new signature show for the channel, becoming the 9 p.m. centerpiece of an expanded three-hour Sunday block running through the summer. Previously HBO had filled only the 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. block with original series; starting in June that will begin at 8 p.m.

The show, which stars Rebecca DeMornay and Luke Perry, was created by David Milch, who was behind the HBO drama “Deadwood.” That western series, if not quite earning a place on HBO’s album of greatest hits, had an ardent following. Fans felt blindsided by the news that Mr. Milch and HBO were shutting down “Deadwood” at the end of last season.

That decision was later rescinded and HBO now plans to do two movie versions of “Deadwood” to tie up loose ends. Mr. Albrecht said the experience had taught HBO some lessons about the need to wrap up big serialized dramas, out of obligation to those paying customers who had been devoted to the shows.

Bracketing “John” at 8 and 10 p.m. will be HBO’s two most-talked about returning series, the drama “Big Love,” with its family of increasingly desperate polygamists, and the comedy “Entourage,” which, with its adventures of footloose young men in Hollywood, ranks as HBO’s chief holdover cultural phenomenon.

HBO will be adding a new comedy at 10:30 p.m., “Flight of the Conchords,” about a singing duo from New Zealand encountering life in New York. Larry David’s comedy series “Curb Your Enthusiasm” will also be returning for another season of episodes, early next year.

One new comedy Mr. Albrecht said he expected to make a significant contribution to HBO’s next phase is “12 Miles of Bad Road,” a new show from Linda Bloodworth-Thomason (“Designing Women”), which stars Gary Cole and Lily Tomlin and plays like “Dallas” remade by Christopher Guest.

HBO will use a new scheduling format for a drama called “In Treatment.” Adapted (actually, translated) from a hit Israeli show, the half-hour series stars Gabriel Byrne as a therapist who holds sessions with a different patient each night and then undergoes his own therapy session (with Dianne Weist as the doctor). The other patients, played by, among others, Blair Underwood and a young actress named Mia Wasikowska, will return for appointments on the same nights for 10 weeks.

A somewhat similar premise is the framework for “Tell Me You Love Me,” which traces the lives of couples in therapy, though their sessions will fill only a small part of the hourlong drama. The rest will cover their intimate lives — and the series, which was once titled “SexLife” and stars Sonya Walger and Jane Alexander, will actually uncover a lot of that.

A mini-series kidnapping thriller called “Five Days” was a hit in England, and HBO, which co-produced the series with the BBC, will show it here later this year. But HBO’s most anticipated mini-series in production is “John Adams” based on the biography by David McCullough, produced by Tom Hanks and starring Paul Giamatti and Laura Linney.

Another series returning for its final season is “The Wire,” the crime series set in Baltimore that received lavish critical praise last season. But this Sunday will mark the end of another highly regarded drama, “Rome.”

The audience for “Rome” has grown in its second season, but the decision had already been made to end production, mainly because of high costs. HBO expects to lose perhaps $30 million on the series, but Mr. Albrecht said he would make a deal like that again.

HBO can afford to spend more lavishly than other networks, he said, thanks to its business model. That model, he said, is expected to keep the cash flowing even if one crime family in New Jersey will no longer be delivering those little envelopes stuffed with riches.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/22/business/media/22hbo.html?pagewanted=print