From: cpd@cat.pan.net   
      
   "cloud dreamer"  wrote in message   
   news:0-2dnZatTZzn9pTQnZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d@supernews.com...   
   > On 15/12/2010 9:45 PM, catpandaddy wrote:   
   >>   
   >> "cloud dreamer"  wrote in message   
   >> news:lpadnVv41YQUwpTQnZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d@supernews.com...   
   >>> On 15/12/2010 8:57 PM, catpandaddy wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "AC"  wrote in message   
   >>>> news:sTcOo.37284$PE1.25505@newsfe29.ams2...   
   >>>>> catpandaddy wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> "AC"  wrote in message   
   >>>>>> news:6XUNo.53097$Wk6.47419@newsfe27.ams2...   
   >>>>>>> Dillon Pyron wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> Apparently the David Hasselhof "reality show" has been cancelled   
   >>>>>>>> after   
   >>>>>>>> two episodes. The lead in show (Ozzy?) came in with 1.4 million and   
   >>>>>>>> David's show had 740 odd thousand and then a little over 600K.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Now THAT'S tanking. When you flush 50% of your audience, either the   
   >>>>>>>> network screwed up in its positioning or your show sucks. Losing   
   >>>>>>>> another almost 18% the next week suggests it wasn't positioning.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Yeah, it tanked. This, er, show just tanked worse. Both still   
   >>>>>>> tanked.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> --   
   >>>>>>> AC   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Fawlty Towers only lasted for 12 shows total, but people consider   
   >>>>>> it to   
   >>>>>> be a good series even so!   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Yeah.... and? Several British shows did this, stopping when its right   
   >>>>> to, rather than milking it. Are you suggesting either of the above   
   >>>>> shows stopped for creative reasons??? Surely not.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> So where does Firefly fit in on this spectrum here? It wasn't stopped   
   >>>> for creative reasons, but also wasn't a poor quality show, so we need a   
   >>>> third category there.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Low ratings.   
   >>   
   >> A good show that tanked and was revived by a movie, or a bad show that   
   >> tanked and was pushed into popularity by a movie.   
   >   
   >   
   > It was a good show that got cancelled and the fan outrage got it a movie.   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >> Then there was Star Trek, given less than three full seasons and was   
   >> canned, then forced into syndication by fanmail campaign, became a   
   >> franchise, made a bunch of movies half of which were good and half of   
   >> which weren't, then flamed out with two series too many.   
   >   
   >   
   > The fanmail got it the third season not syndication. NBC threw the third   
   > season into a bad time slot to ensure its demise.   
   >   
   > It went into syndication domestically and internationally in an attempt to   
   > recoup losses and as a result, generated a cult following. That cult   
   > following got the movies.   
   >   
   > The Wrath of Khan's financial and critical success ensured it would be   
   > around a while.   
   >   
   >  ..   
      
   And then Paramount tried to sell the ideas of "Voyager" and "Enterprise" to   
   the network execs, who never suspected they were being played for victims in   
   the studio's greedy "Khan-game"... but by then they were a bunch of   
   khan-artists.  ;o)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)