XPost: rec.arts.tv, alt.tv.scifi.channel
From: your.name@isp.com
"catpandaddy" wrote in message
news:ic1udb$rq$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "Your Name" wrote in message
> news:your.name-1811101339560001@203-109-169-248.dial.dyn.ihug.co.nz...
> > In article , Jim Gysin
> > wrote:
> >> Barry Margolin sent the following on 11/16/2010 10:34 PM:
> >> > In article,
> >> > Jim Gysin wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Again, I'm talking about SF *fans*, so once you start talking about
> >> >> people who don't like westerns not watching westerns, you're going
> >> >> off-track.
> >> >
> >> > But you can't make a profit operating a network that just caters to
> >> > this
> >> > niche demographic.
> >> >
> >> > If SyFy were doing this for artistic value, then we'd certainly get
> >> > high
> >> > quality fare (and they wouldn't have changed their name). But it's a
> >> > *business*, and that means attracting a broader audience.
> >>
> >> Syfy made the changes that it made because it wanted a larger audience.
> >> That's not the same thing as saying that Syfy could not have continued
> >> on just fine without making the changes. Like most businesses, they
> >> wanted to grow; they wanted a bigger piece of the pie, even though
there
> >> was nothing wrong with the piece that they had to begin with.
> >
> >
> > That's called "big business" and is run by greedy morons who far too
often
> > drive their company into the ground, and then leave with an obscene
amount
> > of money while the real workers get nothing. X-(
>
> Yeah, those poor actors are homeless and must beg for food.
Nobody said anything about actors, but they do get over-paid obscene
amounts, just like greedy management does.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
