• 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

CBS Hasn’t Closed Door to Original Late-Night Programming

Now consider the alternative, which is turning the time back to local affiliates -- many of which are owned by CBS.

CBS network has 280 stations. Only 28 O&Os. That's 10%. The majority are owned by other companies. Networks make money placing their commercials on other stations. Giving that time back to the stations is basically giving up on your business. Not a good plan.
 
CBS network has 280 stations. Only 28 O&Os. That's 10%. The majority are owned by other companies. Networks make money placing their commercials on other stations. Giving that time back to the stations is basically giving up on your business. Not a good plan.
Those 28 O&Os, however, are in the biggest markets. So it may well be a good plan. The marginal cost of lengthening a local newscast is quite low (which is why we've seen this happening in other time slots) and the ratings on an expanded late news in those 28 markets is likely to be higher than for whatever cheap programming CBS could program nationally.

But I guess it does raise another possibility -- if CBS wants cheap program to run nationally, they could just produce a national late-night newscast.
 
But I guess it does raise another possibility -- if CBS wants cheap program to run nationally, they could just produce a national late-night newscast.
They already do. CBS News has been streaming for years. Who'd watch?
 
Now consider the alternative, which is turning the time back to local affiliates -- many of which are owned by CBS. The obvious thing to do is to expand the local late news to an hour, probably followed by syndicated junk. Ignoring the syndicated junk, what is the advertising revenue that CBS O&Os can make from another 25 minutes of late news? I wouldn't be surprised if it is more than the network can make from national late night programming.
Not a chance. They don’t own that many, and even some of the ones they do are laggards in their markets. They’re not getting that revenue back with some more car ads.
Now this is all speculative, of course -- but the point is that the late night revenue that CBS would give up by abandoning that hour is probably pretty low (and shrinking), and there is money to be made by giving the time back to their O&Ss.
There isn’t that much to be made.
 
The marginal cost of lengthening a local newscast is quite low (which is why we've seen this happening in other time slots) and the ratings on an expanded late news in those 28 markets is likely to be higher than for whatever cheap programming CBS could program nationally.
This should probably be a separate topic but I'm not sure how to start it. Last night during "Jeopardy" the station's meteorologist talked about how he continued to do the weather even after the newscast was over on what was like an extended newscast, but on an app. Seems like he's working harder than ever.
 
Seems like he's working harder than ever.
I think that’s definitely true. Our local NBC channel has a news streaming channel where they do weather updates every 10 minutes weekdays. Even assuming many of them are pre-recorded (as weather reported at 8 pm might not need a live update at 8:10 pm) that is more work as are all the social media weather updates they post during the day.
 
Probably. But they keep the perception of an open door because it’s smarter to leave avenues open and respond to the market if circumstances change.
I think they are saying it to save face and not sound like imbeciles for not have a plan. In a few years they will hope everyone forgot about it.

The longer they wait the more expensive it will be to restart their late night plans, and the more people will forget about CBS.
 
Had CBS known what they were doing they would have had a succession plan in place when they fired Colbert. Oh don’t worry here’s the new late night show coming in the fall. Instead they had to sell the timeslot to Allen because they were caught flat footed.
 
Put on a show hosted by a comic who is cheaper than Colbert.

Or Put on a late night game show than can be a little bit more risque than the one's you show during the day.

Or kick someone from news upstairs to do a nightline type show like ABC had back in the day. Just one topic. Two guests max.

CBS would do fine in any of these scenarios.
 
Keep in mind that there were several years between then end of Pat Sajak and the start of Letterman. CBS didn't fall apart.
But Letterman was quite a coup for CBS. Unless they relaunch late night with a name or program that is headline grabbing, I think it’s safe to say CBS is kissing late night goodbye.
 
Another idea in all seriousness's, consider going the other way. Instead of something brainy like a Nightline show, do Maury Povich re-runs to attract the college crowd, the drunk, the stoned, those that find the previous show too "coastal and elite". Do trash. You'll get numbers and its reruns so cheap.

Or for 2 million or so (about 85% less than Colberts rumoured 15 million salary) hire one of the recently fired Saturday Night Live actors or actresses to do the show. Maybe a woman, has a woman ever hosted something equivalent in that time slot? I am not talking have they hosted a talk show, like Oprah duh, I mean a "after the local news" show. Might work. I'd first consider Heidi Gardner. She seems likeable and with a good "range" for a presenter. There are many others.
 
Had CBS known what they were doing they would have had a succession plan in place when they fired Colbert. Oh don’t worry here’s the new late night show coming in the fall. Instead they had to sell the timeslot to Allen because they were caught flat footed.
CBS has changed ownership. They may have had an old plan, but the new owner has put it in the trash.
 
Another idea in all seriousness's, consider going the other way. Instead of something brainy like a Nightline show, do Maury Povich re-runs to attract the college crowd, the drunk, the stoned, those that find the previous show too "coastal and elite". Do trash. You'll get numbers and its reruns so cheap.
Ask "what advertiser would select to have their business promoted in that environment?"
Or for 2 million or so (about 85% less than Colberts rumoured 15 million salary) hire one of the recently fired Saturday Night Live actors or actresses to do the show. Maybe a woman, has a woman ever hosted something equivalent in that time slot? I am not talking have they hosted a talk show, like Oprah duh, I mean a "after the local news" show. Might work. I'd first consider Heidi Gardner. She seems likeable and with a good "range" for a presenter. There are many others.
You are rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Johnny Carson averaged around 15 to 20 million nightly viewers, while Colbert averages around 2.4 to 2.6 million. Carson got as high as 50 million for his "goodbye" show.

Live, over the air TV is moribund. Even the perennial profit center for most "Big 3" network affiliates, the evening and late night local news, is being consolidated between multiple stations or done remotely for multiple markets out of a production center... often in another state.
 


Back
Top Bottom