Here's the interview if you didn't see it @Errol

https://www.remindmagazine.com/article/32843/kassie-depaiva-one-life-to-lives-cancellation-todd-blair/

1 hour ago, Errol said:

Love Kassie, but it's clear she, among others, is misremembering how the show's ratings were when the announcement to cancel finally came. Same for Susan Lucci and All My Children.

Weeks before the dual cancellations were announced, One Life to Live started to show signs of health in terms of viewership and a growing demo performance, often topping General Hospital. Sadly, it was too little, too late. Ad rates had already been set, and for both those shows, they were significantly down revenue-wise. No matter, Susan was told the show was healthy by some mystery VP, as she said on Good Morning America, trying to quell Jamey Giddens' reporting at DC at the time.

Making a dollar profit is not proof of health. Despite the political aspect of it, Paramount did, in fact, cancel The Late Show with Stephen Colbert because he was losing them millions. Being #1 in the daypart doesn't suddenly mean you're making the network/studio money.

Today's announcement by Peacock that it'll keep DAYS on through 2027-2028 proves the show is making the streaming service money, even though they don't tout its success in press releases. Same with CBS/Paramount+ with it renewing The Young and the Restless and The Bold and the Beautiful through 2027-2028, and to a lesser extent, Beyond the Gates through 2025-2026.

Soaps are doing for the streaming services what they once did for the broadcast networks in the 1980s, helping keep the lights on and paying them bills as churn is low among the group primarily watching soaps.

👏🏻

4 hours ago, bongobong said:

The administration hasn't ideologically changed in the 2 months or so since Paramount renewed BTG, The Chi, Yellow Jackets, Ghosts, probably 30 RuPaul spinoffs, and hopefully/likely Lioness will be announced soon.

The Chi is on its way out and not hugely prominent. YJ is a genre show first and foremost and likely has one more season to it. Any specific show aside: Paramount/Skydance has proven they will do anything to curry favor with Trump and the right, and you should expect more of the same.

Bottom line?

Yeah, soaps are kind of dying. The vets are aging, the writing's lazy, the magic’s mostly gone, Shrinking Budgets and Ratings - and honestly, most of the shows feel like they’re just coasting. They’re not what they used to be, and a lot of fans are sticking around more out of habit than excitement.

Unless the networks seriously shake things up - new talent, better writing, fresh energy - we’re just watching a slow, quiet goodbye.

Maybe soaps should end on a high note - with dignity - rather than fade into a shadow of themselves. But if they’re going to keep going, they need more than nostalgia.

They said soaps were dying 15 years ago. Here we are.

I don't think you can compare the late night situation with daytime.

First of all, the late night ad revenue has absolutely plummeted - from $439 million in 2018 to dropping by 50% last year. Daytime (and primetime) is still profitable, part in due to license fees to streaming, off network syndication and overseas sales. Late night shows do not have this, which is why Colbert's show costing 100 million (or around ~650k per episode) became a huge issue. It was entirely reliant on first-run ad revenue and estimated on losing about $40 million per year. 

Add what we know about The Talk's streaming numbers since Beyond the Gates had a four digit increase on that medium. While the added est. 300k viewers on streaming might not sound like much, that's 300k clicking on a streaming platform per day to see a new episode of their stories. There's a reason why Days of our Lives is now secured for the next three seasons on Peacock. 

Ultimately, streaming has helped out soaps so far with platforms wanting to secure cheap content that makes people log on daily. It's killing shows that are leaning towards current subjects and that has no after life like late night shows. 

Soaps are not dying and aren't expensive, they just aren't paid attention to. I do think Days at Peacock is a story worth celebrating (although they don't celebrate it themselves) as is BTG launching and doing well. 

The biggest problems soaps face when it comes to the future is new studio heads who don't understand their value. Look what happened with Neighbours: it was successful and likely one of the least expensive shows on Prime but a "new vision" caused the show to be cancelled. That is something I worry about with BTG but my hope is that because it's ratings are decent that they just won't pay attention and notice it's there. Now if George Cheeks loses his job I won't lie and say I won't worry. 

2 hours ago, asafi said:

Bottom line?

Yeah, soaps are kind of dying. The vets are aging, the writing's lazy, the magic’s mostly gone, Shrinking Budgets and Ratings - and honestly, most of the shows feel like they’re just coasting. They’re not what they used to be, and a lot of fans are sticking around more out of habit than excitement.

Unless the networks seriously shake things up - new talent, better writing, fresh energy - we’re just watching a slow, quiet goodbye.

Maybe soaps should end on a high note - with dignity - rather than fade into a shadow of themselves. But if they’re going to keep going, they need more than nostalgia.

Heard this for the last two decades and yet it's never happened

If soaps are dying, then the time that they're taking to "die" is making a terminal illness storyline on GH look like nothing 😂😂😂

I think if the last decade-plus has proven anything it's that soaps can survive, and thrive. But we're all right that they have to modernize more, and I still think streaming a la the PP/Hulu soaps (and Days on Peacock) is the future. And I'll say again I think the model will still come down to seasonal arcs, a la Port Charles or Linda Gottlieb's plan for OLTL (or the one Prospect Park attempted to enact when they ran out of money lol), which would save money. And yes, probably down to 30 mins unless you have a special episode or something.

2 hours ago, Chris B said:

The biggest problems soaps face when it comes to the future is new studio heads who don't understand their value. Look what happened with Neighbours: it was successful and likely one of the least expensive shows on Prime but a "new vision" caused the show to be cancelled. 

Yeah, that came down to a management change at Amazon and the big streamers simply not understanding the long-term haul investment of soaps despite craving the same long tail of dedicated viewership for their existing sitcoms, dramas, etc. which they regularly acquire. Maybe they will eventually, maybe they won't. But even now it doesn't like seem Neighbours is definitely dead and may resurrect in one form or another.

My biggest concern for BTG is the effects of the Paramount merger and the anticipatory obedience every major conglomerate is offering towards Trump. Amazingly the show has largely escaped the notice of the online right, and may well continue to do so and hopefully it never becomes an issue. Or, at worst, BTG makes it through to the midterms, the makeup in Congress changes and Trump has bigger problems (not that he doesn't have some now).

Edited July 25Jul 25 by Vee

1 hour ago, AbcNbc247 said:

If soaps are dying, then the time that they're taking to "die" is making a terminal illness storyline on GH look like nothing 😂😂😂

What a great line!!!! LOL! Thanks for that start to my online day. 🙃🤪☕

The only real "death" I see in soaps these days is... lack of creativity and good head writers. And I want to underline the word "head".  With few exceptions... we just don't have what we used to have. I'm not putting everyone in the same box, there is the good, the bad and the ugly... but... I think some people just refuse to let it go... they've ran past their usefulness and talent (or lack of it)... deep down they KNOW it... but won't give new fresh voices a chance.  That's a big, big topic that can go many directions. I just don't understand how some people can continue repeating 3 storylines for 10-20-30 years and think it's okay. There's no way for the genre to evolve and improve when it's the same trite every single year. 

Other than that... I believe in my heart of hearts that soap operas are a genre that has much life left in it. BTG's premiere this year proved this. The reality show phenomenon has slowly lost it's initial attraction, people crave scripted drama again... and are tired of watching 24/7 reality shows. People want to be entertained the good old fashioned way - they crave the drama, the suspense and the culminations of these stories. 

Aaaand in the age of the "hungry for quantity" viewer... who wants more and more and more content... soaps give that opportunity to binge watch in the "whatever" streaming platform as much as they want. They retain the viewers for a longer period. Yeah, it's great when a platform attracts new subscribers who want to watch a 10 episode a year show... (they made me subscribe for couple of months to watch AJLT) but what happens when that show ends and these viewers start cancelling their subscription? Soaps keep people FED and satisfied longer. I speak for myself. I prefer to watch a longer storyline (more episodes), I don't mind the 10-20 episodes shows, but I also crave that soapy never-ending sweetness and that feeling that I can always count on playing the next episode. 

Soaps also have the huge advantage of being able to tell a story with lots of points of view and play out every beat. It's not like a character meets someone and marries them in 2 episodes... and then divorces them in episode 8. Soaps give us the opportunity to bond with the characters - we see how their relationship starts, we see their troubles, we see their every-day dynamics, we see the humanity in depth. (If it's written adequately) Not that prime-time can't do that in their own way, of course... but soaps have much more time and opportunity to do this. 

Again... the biggest fear for me is that lack of creativity and writing talent will degrade the genre into something vile and stupid, where it will start completely losing it's appeal till one day it's a parody of the golden era and people don't even remember what it used to be. 

That's just my 2 cents. 

Edited July 25Jul 25 by Maxim

52 minutes ago, Maxim said:

The only real "death" I see in soaps these days is... lack of creativity and good head writers. And I want to underline the word "head".  With few exceptions... we just don't have what we used to have. I'm not putting everyone in the same box, there is the good, the bad and the ugly... but... I think some people just refuse to let it go... they've ran past their usefulness and talent (or lack of it)... deep down they KNOW it... but won't give new fresh voices a chance.  That's a big, big topic that can go many directions. I just don't understand how some people can continue repeating 3 storylines for 10-20-30 years and think it's okay. There's no way for the genre to evolve and improve when it's the same trite every single year. 

Other than that... I believe in my heart of hearts that soap operas are a genre that has much life left in it. BTG's premiere this year proved this. The reality show phenomenon has slowly lost it's initial attraction, people crave scripted drama again... and are tired of watching 24/7 reality shows. People want to be entertained the good old fashioned way - they crave the drama, the suspense and the culminations of these stories. 

Aaaand in the age of the "hungry for quantity" viewer... who wants more and more and more content... soaps give that opportunity to binge watch in the "whatever" streaming platform as much as they want. They retain the viewers for a longer period. Yeah, it's great when a platform attracts new subscribers who want to watch a 10 episode a year show... (they made me subscribe for couple of months to watch AJLT) but what happens when that show ends and these viewers start cancelling their subscription? Soaps keep people FED and satisfied longer. I speak for myself. I prefer to watch a longer storyline (more episodes), I don't mind the 10-20 episodes shows, but I also crave that soapy never-ending sweetness and that feeling that I can always count on playing the next episode. 

Soaps also have the huge advantage of being able to tell a story with lots of points of view and play out every beat. It's not like a character meets someone and marries them in 2 episodes... and then divorces them in episode 8. Soaps give us the opportunity to bond with the characters - we see how their relationship starts, we see their troubles, we see their every-day dynamics, we see the humanity in depth. (If it's written adequately) Not that prime-time can't do that in their own way, of course... but soaps have much more time and opportunity to do this. 

Again... the biggest fear for me is that lack of creativity and writing talent will degrade the genre into something vile and stupid, where it will start completely losing it's appeal till one day it's a parody of the golden era and people don't even remember what it used to be. 

That's just my 2 cents. 

That's at the very least 25 bucks. 

2 hours ago, Maxim said:

Again... the biggest fear for me is that lack of creativity and writing talent will degrade the genre into something vile and stupid, where it will start completely losing it's appeal till one day it's a parody of the golden era and people don't even remember what it used to be. 

Honestly I'm not sure we're not there already, or at the very least very near to that point.