https://variety.com/2019/tv/news/go...l-strahan-sara-haines-keke-palmer-1203313977/
Keke Palmer is named as the new host for ABC's “GMA3: Strahan, Sara & Keke,”
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
ABC Makes More Changes to its ‘GMA’ Extension
- Thread starter Y2kTheNewOldies
- Start date
https://variety.com/2019/tv/news/go...l-strahan-sara-haines-keke-palmer-1203313977/
Keke Palmer is named as the new host for ABC's “GMA3: Strahan, Sara & Keke,”
ABC trying really hard to save what has already been a flop. it flopped as GMA Day, it flopped as Strahan & Sara and this will flop too, just give the hour back to the affilates already ABC, at least i know if this happens, WFAA, my local ABC station can move their midday news back to noon.
There’s just no reason to include the GMA3 at this point unless it’ll be downplayed on air, much like the current “GMA” name is a barely noticeable presence.
Mgomrjsurf
Banned
KMBC can add a Midday Newscast then.
The Chew is not coming back. Game shows are not coming back. ABC News is not giving up that hour anytime in the near future. They are not returning the hour anytime in the near future.
Giving the time back to the local stations would only bring about more trash talk, courtroom shows, and infomercials. So even if it's a talk show I care nothing about seeing I'd rather see ABC continue something in that time slot.
Why doesnt abc try to do a daytime game show to go against cbs.
Why don't they do an extension of their news show to go against NBC?
Wait, that's what they are doing.
There's more than one way to program. Just because CBS has a couple of games in there doesn't mean ABC needs it. They do fine with their games in primetime in the summer, a space where CBS doesn't compete because they don't need it.
Right now, it's financially advantageous for ABC to use the GMA resources to fill that hour. CBS isn't in the same spot with their morning news franchise.
Different approaches.
Wait, that's what they are doing.
There's more than one way to program. Just because CBS has a couple of games in there doesn't mean ABC needs it. They do fine with their games in primetime in the summer, a space where CBS doesn't compete because they don't need it.
Right now, it's financially advantageous for ABC to use the GMA resources to fill that hour. CBS isn't in the same spot with their morning news franchise.
Different approaches.
You know not everything is about money i dont get why a lot of people think no matter what programming decision is made for the sole pupose of making money who cares if one show is making more than another networks its about how people will be impacted by the show and in positive ways.
They're a business. Their duty to shareholders is to make money. So yes, it's about the bottom line. As well it should be.
Sure, there are occasional "goodwill" efforts or loss leaders, but a daily hour of daytime programming five days a week 52 weeks per year isn't one of them.
I'm not sure how switching to game shows in lieu of the talk show is somehow going to be measured as "impacting people in positive ways," since there are people who very much like both kinds of programs.
When an investor risks their saving in a project, there are also employees who risk their careers. We all hope the venture will be successful and the key measurement of that is profitability. If the profits are not adequate, a show or a format will not continue.
If it succeeds, there can be more money for the crew, and more opportunities to explore how the show can also contribute to its constituency and be a good citizen in the process.
But you can not progress beyond a pilot in TV or a few months in a format or radio show without showing growth and appeal to sales demos. No good can be done if the show does not make money and is cancelled.
And our company's owners know when we are not performing as well as the competition. They know that if that goes on long, they will sell their shares and invest in the other guy. The enterprise will not be able to finance operations and new projects, and everyone gets fired.
So year, everyone SHOULD focus on profit. Otherwise, they won't be there the next year or season.
Whel price is right has been on for like over 25 years doesnt get cancelled and replaced every couple years like a lot of these talk shows so that why I said that abc should look at going that route.
And how long has The View been on? Couple of decades now.
Price is a unique case. Game shows on average turned over on the networks as often as talk shows in syndication now do. Some had long tenures, but many came and went in a few years or less.
Basing strategy on an outlier is bad for business.
Price is a unique case. Game shows on average turned over on the networks as often as talk shows in syndication now do. Some had long tenures, but many came and went in a few years or less.
Basing strategy on an outlier is bad for business.
A good example was a re-start of Deal Or No Deal last season. The original was a hit while the restart, even with the same host, made three episodes before being quietly cancelled.
I know it's difficult for a viewer to understand the costs and amount of work involved in pitching a game show and all the commitments therein, but there are a lot of expensive elements just to get one started.
You truly don’t know how this business works, do ya?
Pyramid not a daytime game show though.
No, it really doesn’t.
- Status