Jump to content

P&G shopping ATWT and GL as package deal?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Where would they put ATWT anyway, that part makes no sense to me. OLTL and AMC have better demos than ATWT. And if the soapnet deal fell through, why would you even bother pitching Frons- That part has lost me. I know we are not supposed to print gossip over here but it was too interesting to pass up. Maybe some internet thing.. The Frons aspect has me perplexed. I can only think that they may pitch ATWT only, for soapnet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, exactly. They are clearly EXPLORING a "Soapnet-first" distribution model.

Now, here's where the devious part of me clicks in.

I can bet that Frons might consider acquiring these shows. He'd argue for buying first (at a very, very, very low investment -- probably with payback to P&G in the form of a % of gross or % of profit). Assuming P&G rebuffs that, I could imagine Frons "reluctantly" agreeing (at punitively low license fees) to acquire these soaps for a one-year license. The shows would be so crippled, they'd probably lens everything against a white background, like a high school production.

Then, they'd run on Soapnet with low promotion, in off hours. Quickly they would be "not financially sustainable". Basically, Soapnet only has midnight and 1 am available (and subsequent broadcasts) on its digital channel. Soapnet is not going to monkey with its 7 pm - 10 pm block, since that is the only part of the network that shows some growth.

Under this scenario, Soapnet would be the "hero" (having 'saved' dying pieces of Americana), probably would have acquired archival broadcast rights/streaming rights (not worth much now, but maybe some day). Lots of free press for that.

After one year, BOTH shows would be cancelled. What Frons would have achieved is effectively killing > 50% of the daypart soap competition at his biggest rival, CBS. CBS becomes this impoverished daytime landscape, Frons has no long-term liability.

Even if this machiavellian scheme doesn't work out, it might force Bloom to get into a little bidding war over the ATWT license fee...and that could effectively cause CBS some financial hardship during these difficult times. Frons would like that. Worst case scenario....Bloom/CBS walks away from ATWT saying "too rich for my blood", and then Frons says "you know...we can't afford you either". And ATWT ends up without a home too.

Finally, the only reason I could imagine this not happening is because money is soooooooooo tight. I wonder if Frons (and his bosses at ABC) would let him risk squandering a year of license fees on proven money losers, just to screw over CBS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I don't believe this for a minute. And I'm sorry but I prefer to have Guiding Light/ATWT canceled than be touched by anything Frons/ABC.

I think all this talk about finding new "homes" for their soaps is to make P&G look like they give a damn and CBS as the bad guy. When in reality, P&G are the ones who canceled GL (and soon ATWT). They haven't done anything with their shows in years. They were just waiting for the right time to let them go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What if ATWT and GL moved to SoapNet as a 1 hour package, each show 30 minutes with a trimmed cast? Is that crazy talk? And can someone explain to me the argument that 1/2 hour shows cost the same and sometimes more than hour shows, I remember people saying that on boards and it has never made any sense to me. I especially can't see that being true with a smaller cast and crew and a shorter shooting day on top of ATWT and GL's recent bare bones production values.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, I was shocked to read on DC that, basically, ATWT is cancelled. It will wrap up Sept 2010.

Well, as sad as that is, I like the idea of an 18-month "closure window". They have a year and a half to plan a GOOD farewell. I doubt they will do this...but they could.

Let's see how this shopping around goes.

Honestly, for both apparent "disposable income" (based on the number of original films they produce) and audience-type, I don't see why P&G doesn't shop these two products to the Hallmark Channel. That feels like a fit to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Annie was not brought in as an antagonist for Reva. Reva wasn’t even on the canvas when Annie first appeared in late 1994. 
    • The speculation……….very entertaining. 
    • I had forgotten that several Days stars came out strong against Melissa. Good for them!
    • That would have made sense. Did all these characters get dropped when DePriest left or had they already been dropped?
    • The other issue with Missy: in June 2020, she "liked" some social media posts by Candace Owens -- things Candace said that were against Black Lives Matter.  That is described here https://tvline.com/news/melissa-reeves-racism-days-of-our-lives-instagram-controversy-2894568/ I don't know if that was ever resolved.
    • She appeared onscreen not long after Rose Livingston and Sara Montaigne, and we found out that Sara was Rose's estranged daughter. I wonder whether Peggy might have been part of that family group -- or else they were just juggling a few different potential mysteries so that they could develop whatever seemed to be getting the best response from the audience. They didn't do anything much with Rose and Sara really either. Maybe Rose would have become more prominent if Rachel and Mac had split up over Mitch, or if Sara had really flourished. In some ways I can picture Cheryl being affected by MJ's prostitution similarly to how Josie was distressed by finding out about Sharlene. But I can also see that Josie as a Frame being involved with Matthew would have different stakes for Rachel and Sharlene than Cheryl being involved with Scott. I do think the solution for Cheryl would have had to be a badder boy than Scott -- either a real bad boy who would do her wrong, or the kind of bad boy (not Chad!!!) who is essentially misunderstood and other people just don't understand. Cheryl would also have been better off with some friends her own age. Matthew and Josie benefited a bit from having other teenagers to interact with.
    • Sally Spencer was a decent actress, but the writing destroyed the "M.J." that Kathleen Layman had built. Layman had a quiet strength about her, and she and Osburn really felt like sisters. Spencer's character should have been either an unmentioned sister, or maybe Jake's that grew up close to Kathleen, M.J. and the rest, but was away for a few years before joining the force. Kristen Marie was o.k., but I always got a mousier vibe from her. Being pigeon-holed with Scott for most of the run hurt things for her, as well.  The Loves were also underserved between Rhonda Lewin and Philece Sampler. Philece would have been better as Nicole. Thank goodness Anne Heche  showed up for the next round of auditions. Christopher Holder was mediocre as Peter, but given a shot, I think Marcus Smythe could have stuck around for a while.  I would have had Peggy Lazarus be a Frame -- possibly an ex-wife for Vince with an agenda. Smythe and Hollen had  a fun chemistry that could have kept the two around.. Bringing recasts for  Cheryl and Ben back mixing it up with other Frames. Corys, Lawrences at the time might have kept all the families stronger. 
    • shoot...he said in that Locher room with Krista. I think he met her before that---she was doing Broadway and they had mutual friends or an agent maybe?
    • Yes. And I assume he met Mary Ellen Stuart at GL.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy