Byron Allen gets the Colbert timeslot

[michael hagerty]

I gotta ask the question again. Is CBS doing all these things because they're necessary? Or due to the owners' own agenda?

If you're still asking this, I don't know what I could tell you that would answer it. This is clearly agenda-driven. Ellison's cancellation of Colbert and his and Bari Weiss' neutering of CBS News have made Trump happy, and Trump indicated a willingness to decide the Paramount Skydance-Netflix-Warners deal in Paramount Skydance's favor before Netflix dropped out.

 

[TheBigA]

I gotta ask the question again. Is CBS doing all these things because they're necessary? Or due to the owners' own agenda?

How much experience does this owner have in broadcasting or TV networks? None.

David Ellison is a movie guy. When the sale to Skydance was being discussed, a lot of us expected him to sell off CBS as his first act. He might still do it to pay down some of the WBD debt.

He began by selling off CBS buildings. Now he's cutting excessive costs. He paid top dollar to get these properties, and he appears to be running them into the ground. I haven't seen ANY creative successes coming from any part of his company. My expectation is he will sell CBS to one of the major TV owners. It's possible that they won't buy until he cuts down all the expenses.

 

[michael hagerty]

Yes, but it's extremely minimal spot revenue in late night in most markets anyway. A 30" spot on Colbert's Late Show goes for about $40 on my local CBS station in market #108. I think the local station gets about 6 minutes in the show, so their max revenue, if every position is sold, is about $500, or about $400 after agency commissions. And when I watch, the local positions are largely unsold and filled by promos for their news app or weather team, so even that figure is largely theoretical.

Yes, but---that's still potential revenue ($400 a night times 260 weeknights) of $104,000 and I gotta think that a station in market #108's gross revenues are such that six figures of potential income dropping to maybe half that isn't something to take lightly.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

How much experience does this owner have in broadcasting or TV networks? None.

David Ellison is a movie guy. When the sale to Skydance was being discussed, a lot of us expected him to sell off CBS as his first act. He might still do it to pay down some of the WBD debt.

He began by selling off CBS buildings. Now he's cutting excessive costs. He paid top dollar to get these properties, and he appears to be running them into the ground. I haven't seen ANY creative successes coming from any part of his company. My expectation is he will sell CBS to one of the major TV owners. It's possible that they won't buy until he cuts down all the expenses.

There's an obvious parallel between the Ellisons buying up these traditional media companies and Elon buying twitter thanks to their excessive wealth, and the way they're using these companies as their personal ideological influence toys.

 

[Mark Roberts]

He began by selling off CBS buildings. Now he's cutting excessive costs. He paid top dollar to get these properties, and he appears to be running them into the ground.

Shades of Bobby Sarnoff!

I haven't seen ANY creative successes coming from any part of his company. My expectation is he will sell CBS to one of the major TV owners. It's possible that they won't buy until he cuts down all the expenses.

Also of note: Oracle stock has lost considerable value, due to investor concerns over the amount of debt it's taking on to build out cloud-computing infrastructure to support AI for clients. Some analysts are calling it a buying opportunity but others have their doubts, and Morningstar gives it a "very high uncertainty" rating even while noting that its debt has remained investment-grade. In other words, the picture is mixed. Moreover, AI plays in general may not be all they're cracked up to be. The relevance to CBS is that a financial backstop that one might assume to be present for Skydance may not be as great as some might think.

Oracle Stock Has Lost More Than Half Its Value in 6 Months. It May Finally Be Time to Buy.

The cloud giant's valuation has become much more reasonable following a brutal sell-off, and its massive backlog suggests brighter days ahead.

finance.yahoo.com

Loading…

www.morningstar.com

 

[TheBigA]

There's an obvious parallel between the Ellisons buying up these traditional media companies and Elon buying twitter thanks to their excessive wealth, and the way they're using these companies as their personal ideological influence toys.

The difference being that Elon kept twitter, while my expectation is Ellison wants to sell. He has no interest in ancient technology.

Shades of Bobby Sarnoff!

Or Larry Tisch.

Oracle stock has lost considerable value

The same has happened to Microsoft.

The relevance to CBS is that a financial backstop that one might assume to be present for Skydance may not be as great as some might think.

The fact that they've had to take on loans from 3 mid east countries says that's right.

 

[nomadcowatbk]

Or Larry Tisch.

will little David and Lachlan pay enough to keep the NFL unlike Larry?

 

[michael hagerty]

will little David and Lachlan pay enough to keep the NFL unlike Larry?

The NFL is the franchise for FOX. It’s what drove their acquisition of full-market signal stations 30-plus years ago.

NFL & Fox: The $1.6B Deal That Changed Everything

In 1993, Rupert Murdoch vastly overpaid for NFC media rights. But the deal turned Fox into a major American TV network and completely changed the economics of the NFL.

share.google

 

[DavinaR]

In my highly uninformed opinion, I think the affiliates will drift away, opting to run other syndicated programming in that 11:35 slot, maybe even rerunning shows they already have the rights to (e.g., Jeopardy + Wheel of Fortune) a second time. At least then they get to sell most of their inventory themselves, rather than the dregs of the network hour. They may wait a month or three to see how Byron does in that slot, but by the start of the new season a significant percentage of the affiliates will be off doing their own thing. (If they're contractually forced to air CBS's feed, I suspect it will be at a later hour, maybe the same 12:35 he's already airing at.)

I was thinking that as well. Some if not a lot of affiliates will pre-empt it. He will have both 11:35 and 12:35 with Funny You should Ask.

 

[DavinaR]

I don't know what it is, but, somehow, I have a harder time warming up to Kimmel than to Colbert. Perhaps it's remembering Kimmel's earlier work, which did not resonate with me at all. But some of Colbert's earlier work also left me cold. I never cared for "Strangers with Candy", for example, and still don't understand why he thinks so highly of Robert Smigel, whom I can't stand. But the majority of Colbert's more recent work really hits the mark. Maybe I just need to give Kimmel a chance.

When you mean Jimmy Kimbles earlier stuff do you mean The Man Show on Commedy Central?

 

[DavinaR]

Here's the problem:

The language allowing pre-emptions or timeslot shifts is in the affiliation contracts---it's not a show-by-show thing. So the affiliates are as obligated to carry Byron at 11:35 as they are Colbert currently.

Contesting that would open up their affiliation agreement for renegotiation, which would also give the network the opportunity to shop itself to less picky, starving stations in the market.

Good point, so they will have to air it even if they don't want to.

 

[DavinaR]

Here's the trouble with infomercials, from a guy who worked at a station that lived on them for a few years:

Most are what are known as "per inquiry" spots. The sponsor figures out how many calls and orders it needs from a given station for its product to be profitable, and it prices its offer for the time accordingly.

Every month, the infomercial folks look to see if your station is making the phone ring enough times (the infomercials usually have a unique promo code to identify which stations' airing is responsible for the purchase).

If you're not making their magic number, one of two things happens: They leave, which means you have no money coming in for that half-hour, or they grind you on what they pay for the time to reduce the cost and make that level of inquiry profitable.

That's the first two months, if you're lucky.

Then---even if you're making the phones ring and the infos are profitable (which they won’t tell you) they grind you anyway because what's better than a profit? A bigger profit.

It becomes a race to the bottom.

Yeah, you can replace them (maybe), but that's expensive (someone has to hustle the business), and it also just starts the cycle all over again.

Interesting to learn that. Sounds like that can get costly for stations. On a side note, I remember when you were the Program director and voice at KAZT AZ Tv in the mid 2000s. I watched the station a lot back then.

 

[nickp]

CBS couldn't get anything else other than a Byron Allen show

 

[michael hagerty]

Interesting to learn that. Sounds like that can get costly for stations. On a side note, I remember when you were the Program director and voice at KAZT AZ Tv in the mid 2000s. I watched the station a lot back then.

A belated thanks for watching!

 

[michael hagerty]

CBS couldn't get anything else other than a Byron Allen show

It really looks like they didn't want anything else. Byron buys the hour (now a total of two hours) from CBS at a mutually agreed-upon price, CBS has no costs apart from maybe inventory to run promos that his company produces.

Getting advertisers and making a profit in those two hours becomes Byron's problem, and having taken his syndication pitches at AZ-TV over the years, I understand his fundamental philosophy---strict cost control.

He'll make money, and if CBS was telling the truth about a significant loss on Colbert (too many sources in a position to know say there's no way it was $40 million), they swing from that to whatever Byron's paying them as mostly pure profit.

 

[michael hagerty]

Now? Not really in the same universe as Kimmel/Colbert and the show originally ended back in roughly 2016 so, now it’ll be a mix of old and new. Mostly depends on what a given comic does in their routines. But it won’t be anything on par with what has been on Colbert.

Bryon just got 11:35. If there were content likely to piss Trump off, there won't be anymore. He'll edit. He knows why Colbert is gone, and even if the ratings are iffy, it's gonna be a windfall for him.

That said, Allen himself is nowhere near MAGA-friendly:

Media Mogul Byron Allen: 'I think President Trump is totally wrong' - Allen Media Group

By Sibile Marcellus President Trump is known for lobbing the “fake news” catchphrase at the media in response to criticism of his leadership. Byron Allen, one of America’s few Black media moguls, called him out on it during Yahoo Finance’s All Markets Summit Extra: Road...

allenmedia.tv

 

[umfan]

This is clearly agenda-driven.

No, it's not. It's money and ratings driven.

Allen won't set any ratings records, but he does have it in him to be genuinely talented. He displayed this on 'Real People' some decades ago. He may well do something that CBS hasn't done in Late Night in several years...make a bit of money.

 

[michael hagerty]

No, it's not. It's money and ratings driven.

Did you type that with a straight face?

Trump Reacts to ‘Late Show’ Ending: “I Absolutely Love That Colbert Got Fired”

The president mocks Colbert for CBS' decision — and takes shots at Jimmy Kimmel and Jimmy Fallon, too.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

Colbert gets blown up and the "sticky" Skydance acquisition of Paramount gets approved in a snap. And, having removed the thorn from the lion's paw, sets them up for acquiring Warners.

And since Ellison oversees it all, you can't divorce this move from the current drive to make CBS News and 60 Minutes less threatening to powerful people and interests.

Allen won't set any ratings records,

Well, he might---worst numbers at 11:35 on a major network in 23 years, but go on.

but he does have it in him to be genuinely talented.

No question, although Comics Unleashed relies largely on the group of comics assembled for the show.

He displayed this on 'Real People' some decades ago.

Agreed.

He may well do something that CBS hasn't done in Late Night in several years...make a bit of money.

That's not in doubt. As I mentioned above:

Byron buys the hour (now a total of two hours) from CBS at a mutually agreed-upon price, CBS has no costs apart from maybe inventory to run promos that his company produces.

Getting advertisers and making a profit in those two hours becomes Byron's problem, and having taken his syndication pitches at AZ-TV over the years, I understand his fundamental philosophy---strict cost control.

He'll make money, and if CBS was telling the truth about a significant loss on Colbert (too many sources in a position to know say there's no way it was $40 million), they swing from that to whatever Byron's paying them as mostly pure profit.

 

[radiofan2023]

Is the CBS and Byron Allen agreement for Comics Unleashed at the earlier time, for just one year or is it unknown?

The reason I ask is that for CBS Radio News, in at least one case I know of, their agreement with a station (KCJJ) was for 3 years, the owner Steve just mentioned it on the air. He said CBS wanted to double the barter a little while ago, but Steve said no. So now Steve is going to a new news service starting next week, and not waiting until the very end.

 

[michael hagerty]

Is the CBS and Byron Allen agreement for Comics Unleashed at the earlier time, for just one year or is it unknown?

The reason I ask is that for CBS Radio News, in at least one case I know of, their agreement with a station (KCJJ) was for 3 years, the owner Steve just mentioned it on the air. He said CBS wanted to double the barter a little while ago, but Steve said no. So now Steve is going to a new news service starting next week, and not waiting until the very end.

I didn’t see a length of contract in the story.