LogFAQs > #879350446

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	who knew Last Man Standing would start a revolution
Slip-N-Slide 05/18/17 2:49:37 PM #34:	Caution999 posted... DelianSK posted... From Wikipedia that no one seems to mention Also, the contract between 20th Century Fox Television and ABC for the show, in which 20th Century Fox Television covered the cost of production, had expired after six seasons. Had the series been renewed for a seventh season, ABC would have been required to pick up Last Man Standing's production costs, which the network was unwilling to do. That's a big deal. That includes salaries of everyone involved too. Yeah, you're right. A major Network like ABC (who are owned by Disney) could not have afforded this. What was I thinking? It's not a matter of being able to afford it, it's a matter of it even being worth it. Look at it this way, they effectively had a money machine where they did nothing but pay Fox a flat fee, air it, collect the ad revenue and then pocket some profit. But then if they have to actually start making the show that adds a lot more layers to it. They probably decided that from a business perspective that it wasn't worth what they'll get out of it for what they'll have to put in it. It takes over 3 30 second ad spots just to cover Tim Allen's salary for the show, let alone the rest of the cast and production costs. Let's be honest, if there was a lot of money to be had they'd air it regardless of it being controversial, and if not some other network would pick it up if ABC is just leaving this massive money maker on the table in order to look good. I know it might be shocking that they actually have people who's entire job it is is to determine if things are worth the time and financial investment. --- Get wet. http://i.imgtc.com/2q3z3TmhFO.jpg <cite>Slip-N-Slide posted [p:879350446] in who knew L... [t:75360280]...</cite> <quote><cite>Caution999 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DelianSK posted...</cite> <quote> From Wikipedia that no one seems to mention <quote> Also, the contract between 20th Century Fox Television and ABC for the show, in which 20th Century Fox Television covered the cost of production, had expired after six seasons. Had the series been renewed for a seventh season, ABC would have been required to pick up Last Man Standing's production costs, which the network was unwilling to do. </quote> That's a big deal. That includes salaries of everyone involved too.</quote> Yeah, you're right. A major Network like ABC (who are owned by Disney) could not have afforded this. What was I thinking?</quote> It's not a matter of being able to afford it, it's a matter of it even being worth it. Look at it this way, they effectively had a money machine where they did nothing but pay Fox a flat fee, air it, collect the ad revenue and then pocket some profit. But then if they have to actually start making the show that adds a lot more layers to it. They probably decided that from a business perspective that it wasn't worth what they'll get out of it for what they'll have to put in it. It takes over 3 30 second ad spots just to cover Tim Allen's salary for the show, let alone the rest of the cast and production costs. Let's be honest, if there was a lot of money to be had they'd air it regardless of it being controversial, and if not some other network would pick it up if ABC is just leaving this massive money maker on the table in order to look good. I know it might be shocking that they actually have people who's entire job it is is to determine if things are worth the time and financial investment. --- Get wet. http://i.imgtc.com/2q3z3TmhFO.jpg</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1