Lacey Rose of Forbes has an interview up with Syfy chief, Dave Howe. Not a single reference to Stargate Universe though he did talk about what a huge global franchise Stargate is for MGM. Instead he talked about topics that are practically beloved (at least by the authors of this website, if not our readers) like:
1. what a challenge it is to monetize DVR viewers
2. how he embraces on-demand and encourages cable companies to disable fast-forwarding, which, combined with C3 measurement ultimately allows for everything to be made available on demand. Bill and I both agree that for a large portion of the digital cable subscribers, having everything On Demand at no extra cost would be worth the disabled fast-forwarding functionality just for the convenience (people who couldn't suffer through that would be willing to pay monthly fees for a DVR).
3. how if he were at a broadcast network he would definitely have migrating to dual stream revenue (advertising + retransmission fees) at the top of the list.
4. he also talks about how he'd model Hulu the same as cable companies are modeled advertising + subscription fees. He believes in the Hulu model, but believes its a ways off and hints that they need to add a lot more commercials for that to happen.
He also talks about the success of rebranding efforts (best October ratings ever) and how despite critical acclaim Battlestar Galactica didn't draw as many viewers as it might have because it was on a network called SciFi and because it was set in space. It will be interesting to see how Caprica fares on a network called Syfy, and set on terra firma.
You should read the whole interview and you can follow Lacey on Twitter.
You guys are right that many people today would be willing to sacrifice FF for more OnDemand choice. Unfortunately, today isn’t going to last long. DVR tech is so simple and winning that eventually its penetration will kill off much of the OnDemand audience; at least as a serious money making option.
That’s the problem with the fixes everyone is proposing. By the time they are implemented, they will be practically obsolete. If they implemented his On Demand ideas tomorrow, they’d likely get five years at best out of them. Problem is, they won’t implement them tomorrow, and they have no plan for what to do five years from now even if they did.
I’d be shocked if Caprica got as good ratings as Battlestar Galactica but it should be tons cheaper to produce without the CGI.
RE – rebranding SyFy from Sci-Fi the cause of better ratings paragraph
Bunk. So what if October was a ratings bonanza for them? So what if Warehouse 13 did quite well in its run this past summer? It is far too soon to declare this change (an idiotic one, IMO) to be anything remotely connected with a more successful, broadening of appeal of the network to other people. If the trend holds through Fall 2010 then possibly some credit might be due (but I would hope the shows being offered were the reason, not some lame remake of a two-syllable brand name). I won’t go deep into the comment about BSG ratings because of the name of the network — I will just say that story quality probably had a lot more to do with viewers leaving the show than a brand name — because they’ve already been covered in many other postings on this site (and elsewhere).
More likely Syfy is benefiting from people who have passed by the buffet line of new shows on the networks and are looking elsewhere for things to watch and are finding them in cable-land (and not just on SyFy).
What a terrible guy to be put in charge of a channel with such a long history of Science Fiction, his contempt for the genre shows every time he opens his mouth. Maybe NBC Universal should just admit they hate the genre and sell the channel before he totally destroys its heritage. They already have Chiller, and Sleuth so why not develop one of them that I am sure have much lower ratings than on the channel formally called The Scifi Channel.
Yes, paranormal reality shows cost basically “NOTHING” to produce and for a while they may draw a wider audience share including more women. Of course every women watching can not be watching Bravo or their other women oriented channels. The audience only has so many viewers and every channel can not compete for the same audience at the same time because at some point none will have enough to be successful. The lower costs for cable shows and the pretense of variety is the only way the general public will continue to pay money each month for cable, when every channel becomes the same I will cut off my Directv and just rent the programs I want to watch. Maybe after Comcast buys the channel and after a while when they clean house ( and they will clean house at NBC ) some one honest will take the channel back to its roots. Ratings may seem to grow now but over time the core viewer will completely change and the loyalty the channel once enjoyed will be gone forever. The Stargate franchise will be the first to totally die and with it nothing Science Fiction will be made for the channel. Sadly they always shoe the only genre shows on Friday the lowest rated day of the week.
I still watch reruns on Syfy but nothing new has much appeal to me and I really do believe I am not the only one that has started down the trend to other channels when the TV is turned on.
The Caprica pilot had plenty of CGI. It was just more subtle CGI of futuristic cities instead of spaceships. I doubt that it will be cheaper than BSG to produce.
However, the cost of BSG was shared with Sky in the UK. If Caprica has the same cost-sharing, Caprica might not be more expensive to make than any other SyFy show.
You know, the fact that Mr. Howe is still bringing up the name change hints to me that it’s still an ‘issue’ he feels needs addressing. Leave it alone and move on. He also spends a lot of time sort of avoiding actually talking about Syfy, in a weird way.
I also love the harping on October. Total average viewers are down again at least according to TVbytheNumbers. In other words Syfy, what have you done for me lately. LOL
Actually to be fair to my above post, they are back up this last week of November.
Dave Howe is super dreamy.
just read an interview where Brad Wright said:
“So, you know, at the end of the day you have to trust yourself and the general fan response, not specific fan responses. And that comes down to viewership – are people tuning in and do people seem to watching en masse? That’s the only real barometer you have.”
So, if anyone thinks that by watching the show and then complaining that the producers are listening is wrong according to Brad.
The ONLY thing they understand is viewership, plain and simple.
If you watch/DVR SGU and don’t like it, you are essentially telling them that you do by continuing to watch/DVR.
Just thought you all might want to know this.
I have found it mind boggling that NBC/UNI seems to be fashioning the Chiller Channel the way that many scifi fans wish that they would the Syfy Channel. Everything on the Chiller Channel, as far as I can tell, is either a horror “chiller” or thriller-type program. It’s programmers don’t have a broad definition of what is “chilling” and then schedule stuff that don’t fit that definition without stretching it almost to the point of seeming ridiculous. They don’t seem to have any original programs, with the exception of some specials they are affiliated with as a channel. I have to say, though, that I would think that “Ghost Hunters” would would fit on the Chiller Channel-at least in terms of its subject matter. I guess GH is on Syfy because they use high tech equipment to try and locate the ghosts, so that brings in the “science” part of Syfy, even though many people think that GH is also fiction, and think they are all faking. I don’t know that its true, but it would be humorous if it could be quantified that Syfy’s audience was just tuning in to see how bad or how fake their programming is on a day to day basis. I am not sure how they would feel about that, as I don’t believe that they want to be considered “The Parody Channel,” which is what they would be if that was drawing this much desired audience. I suppose that it could be said that they don’t care as long as they get the audience that the advertisers want, but I think most networks still have enough pride to want to at least “think” that people are tuning in because they want to be entertained by quality things, and not just entertained by schlock. I could be totally wrong, of course, especially when it comes to money.
Let him explain why they dumped Emilie Ullerup for Agam Darshi on Sanctuary. Apparently this was a network decision, not a Sanctuary staff decision. And it was a bad one.
I can’t undertand why the network is tring so hard to break from its fan base. Sci-fi turns syfy which means more main stream shows like wrestling and SG-90210 or Star Trek the teen years.
You are killing something that used to stand for something. BSG was just a soap set in space. That does not make it Sci-fi it makes for crap.