Or, it's about something else entirely.

I think it's more to it than just a week. My guess is that PP wanted more (probably at later dates), and the 2 weren't willing to give it. PP was not paying any of the commuting costs or other expenses so that's another reason to turn them down. Roger's initial 4 weeks are supposed to last for about 2.5 months and I believe they wanted him back at some future dates. ABC/GH probably drew the line.

OLTL and AMC are filming 10 episodes a week ( 2 a day) so 4 weeks will total 40 episodes. Given that the episodes air Monday thru Thursday weekly that is 10 weeks or 2.5 months of air shows that Todd/RH could be in of OLTL

Has the non-episode on Friday been confirmed?

Yes Jeff Kwanitez told soaps.com its a bTS show mixed with interviews

Edited March 26, 201312 yr by John

Good for ABC/GH.

PP tried to strong arm them into being on their webshow when they didnt want to do it. They can have the characters.

KDP is so pressed about this on twitter, its actually equal parts sad and amusing.

I think it's more to it than just a week. My guess is that PP wanted more (probably at later dates), and the 2 weren't willing to give it. PP was not paying any of the commuting costs or other expenses so that's another reason to turn them down. Roger's initial 4 weeks are supposed to last for about 2.5 months and I believe they wanted him back at some future dates. ABC/GH probably drew the line.

there is also the issue of air shows lining up.

even IF they went to OLTL they wouldnt be able to appear on GH until after the OLTL episodes air, one would assume. It would be a mess.

Good for ABC/GH.

PP tried to strong arm them into being on their webshow when they didnt want to do it.

Please point to the shackles.

Good for ABC/GH.

If they're acting out of spite, it's not good for them at all. I don't see a whole lot of clamoring for Kristen Alderson in a dual role.

If they're acting out of spite, it's not good for them at all. I don't see a whole lot of clamoring for Kristen Alderson in a dual role.

I dont think she will be in a dual role, just a new one after a forced break from the show due to PP and their inability to get things going.

Of course its out of spite, but I dont think its just out of spite. I think the team at GH was invested in Todd/Carly, John/Sam, and Starr/Michael before the characters were taken away from them and PP tried to force the actors into doing their webshow or be jobless. The actors shouldnt have to be unemployed because PP couldnt get [!@#$%^&*] done the first time around. They want the characters, fine take them, RC has done a lot more out there stories than something like creating three new characters for actors in this situation.

Im not a fan of RC at all, or usually really ABC either - but the way PP had handled all of this has been so mind blowlingly awful that i cant help defending RC/GH in this situation. I dont think its right to try and hold someones job hostage when you fucked up.

If they were invested in those storylines, that's their [!@#$%^&*] problem. No one else's. The fact is PP owns the license and came back to collect. They were willing to coordinate - and I'm willing to bet, extend some of those storylines while also balancing crossovers. GH doesn't appear to be willing to accept that, since Frank and Ron have rode high as the powers behind Llanview for years on end. But the onus is not on PP to be more magnanimous than them when they already loaned them those characters to begin with.

As for "forcing them," that's bullshit and hyperbole spun up by listening to only ABC's version of events. Of course their narrative is that these poor misbegotten actors are being forced into slave labor by threat of the lash in the merciless hinterlands of an upper-middle-class Connecticut suburb. In reality, what has happened? Only one actor has agreed to appear and the others, we don't know what they would or would not do. What has evil PP actually done? Whose job has been taken? Who has been "forced" to do OLTL? This is a legal snafu that would've resulted no matter who held the reins simply because GH took it upon itself to gamble that OLTL would never come back without Ron and Frank at the helm. And that was wrong. We all believed it, and we all were wrong.

There's three sides to any story. GH's, PP's, and the truth.

Edited March 26, 201312 yr by Vee

They decided to bring OLTL characters on knowing that PP still had the rights. They assumed that it was never going to happen. A good producer or writer - which we hear every second of every day that "Cartini" are - plans for every contingency.

They barely knew what to do with John, or Starr, to the point where they had to dredge up a PC character because John was so utterly boring and unlikeable, a deadbeat father with narcolepsy, who made Kelly Monaco somehow look even more bored than usual. Todd mostly seemed to become popular through Carly, yet they had no apparent storyline for them for most of his run - I've never seen an entire town, including the mother, shrug at a baby switch until now.

Now these actors are so invaluable to the canvas that they need brand new characters. To me, it's about what Ron and Frank want, not what suits the show.

Ron doesn't plan for contingencies anymore. He used to. But it's been too long since anyone told him no and he - or rather the GH regime at large - doesn't appear to be taking it well.

It's looking more and more likely OLTL insisted on creative control of the characters, at least when they were doing crossovers. And I think that's only right. They are OLTL's property.

Edited March 26, 201312 yr by Vee

Yeah, I don't see how any of this is on PP either. ABC knew that PP owned the rights to these characters is now trying to break the licensing agreement. If ABC considered the characters of Starr, Todd, and John so valuable, they should have inserted a clause into the agreement keeping the rights to those characters. Instead ABC gambled that PP would never get its projects off the ground and allowed FV/RC to write them into GH and has lost. The fact is that GH does not need any of these actors/characters and their departure would not break the show either way so I have no clue why ABC does not just let it go.

Edited March 26, 201312 yr by Ann_SS

Yeah, I don't see how any of this is on PP either. ABC knew that PP owned the rights to these characters is now trying to break the licensing agreement. If ABC considered the characters of Starr, Todd, and John were so valuable, they should have inserted a clause into the agreement keeping the rights to those characters. Instead ABC gambled that PP would never get its projects off the ground and allowed FV/RC to write them into GH and has lost. The fact is that GH does not need any of these actors/characters and their departure would not break the show either way so I have no clue why ABC does not just let it go.

I agree, for the most part.

Its the tactics PP used to try and strongarm the actors into doing their webshow that I dont like.

Quotes like this killed soaps. I don't like them

Truest words ever read on SON.

TR sounded just like every arrogant ABC exec of the last 15 years.

Whatever happens with KA, her departure is the perfect opportunity to find Michael a love interest that he actually has some chemistry with. Sam could also do with another love interest as well. Too bad Greg Vaughan is on Days. Does he have a contract there? Can GH steal him away?