WE USED TO BE FRIENDS....A LONG TIME AGO...
Просто познавательное о ТВ бизнесе от Аарона Соркина!
Это к вопросам о рейтингах и стоимости шоу, о том кто где деньги теряет, кто зарабатывает, кто кому платит и за что.
There was a network-wide instruction to cut 60 seconds from hour-long dramas but NBC never lost money on the show and I'd like to use your question as an opportunity to explain--as briefly as I'm able (and I recognize that brevity is a challenge for me)--the economics of commercial television because there have been some questions here that suggest a misunderstanding.
I'm going to use The West Wing as our model because it's fairly typical.
There were three entities involved in putting on that show: the production company (John Wells Productions), the studio (Warner Bros Television) and the network (NBC).
The network paid a license fee of 1.8 million dollars per episode to Warner Bros to produce 22 episodes a year of the show for four years. That 1.8 million wasn't an investment, it was a fee--in exchange for which they get to broadcast each episode twice. The deal also says that each episode has to be 42 minutes and 30 seconds long--leaving 17 minutes and 30 seconds for the network to do with as they please. The network would use 7 minutes and 30 seconds for promos of other shows and keep 10 minutes in inventory to sell. Our minutes sold for about $430,000 but let's round that down to $400,000 to make our lives easier. That means NBC makes 4 million dollars from their 1.8 million fee just for the first airing plus whatever they make for the second airing (about another 2 million.) A profit of over 4 million dollars per episode. That's the only business the network is in.
The financial risk isn't assumed by the network, it's assumed by the studio. Because although 1.8 million is a premium (high) license fee for a drama, it cost the studio about 3.5 million an episode to make the show. For four years, Warner Bros would lose over a million and a half dollars per episode (and that's when I would come in on budget which I legendarily seldom did.) Why would they do such a thing? Because our contract with NBC was only for four years and the studio is in the business of betting that the production company is going to deliver them a hit which is what happened. So when it came time to renegotiate the contract, Warner Bros was now able to turn around and say, "We will put The West Wing on another network unless you do the following: Make us whole (pay us the 150 million or so we lost during the first year) and give us a license fee of SIX million dollars an episode."
And that's what happened. For the final three years of the show, the license fee was six million but it still only cost 3.5 million to do the show. Now WE'RE making a profit of 2.5 million an episode--split among the owners (WB, John Wells and myself). Throw in syndication, DVDs and international and it's not a bad living.
That whole lecture was to make this point. Even with the relatively low ratings of Studio 60, ad revenues far exceeded the license fee. It was Warner Bros that took a bath. Ego, however, forces me to point out that the money WB lost on S-60 didn't make much of a dent in the money they made from The West Wing and I still have my parking space.
Thanks for the question.
Aaron
Это к вопросам о рейтингах и стоимости шоу, о том кто где деньги теряет, кто зарабатывает, кто кому платит и за что.
There was a network-wide instruction to cut 60 seconds from hour-long dramas but NBC never lost money on the show and I'd like to use your question as an opportunity to explain--as briefly as I'm able (and I recognize that brevity is a challenge for me)--the economics of commercial television because there have been some questions here that suggest a misunderstanding.
I'm going to use The West Wing as our model because it's fairly typical.
There were three entities involved in putting on that show: the production company (John Wells Productions), the studio (Warner Bros Television) and the network (NBC).
The network paid a license fee of 1.8 million dollars per episode to Warner Bros to produce 22 episodes a year of the show for four years. That 1.8 million wasn't an investment, it was a fee--in exchange for which they get to broadcast each episode twice. The deal also says that each episode has to be 42 minutes and 30 seconds long--leaving 17 minutes and 30 seconds for the network to do with as they please. The network would use 7 minutes and 30 seconds for promos of other shows and keep 10 minutes in inventory to sell. Our minutes sold for about $430,000 but let's round that down to $400,000 to make our lives easier. That means NBC makes 4 million dollars from their 1.8 million fee just for the first airing plus whatever they make for the second airing (about another 2 million.) A profit of over 4 million dollars per episode. That's the only business the network is in.
The financial risk isn't assumed by the network, it's assumed by the studio. Because although 1.8 million is a premium (high) license fee for a drama, it cost the studio about 3.5 million an episode to make the show. For four years, Warner Bros would lose over a million and a half dollars per episode (and that's when I would come in on budget which I legendarily seldom did.) Why would they do such a thing? Because our contract with NBC was only for four years and the studio is in the business of betting that the production company is going to deliver them a hit which is what happened. So when it came time to renegotiate the contract, Warner Bros was now able to turn around and say, "We will put The West Wing on another network unless you do the following: Make us whole (pay us the 150 million or so we lost during the first year) and give us a license fee of SIX million dollars an episode."
And that's what happened. For the final three years of the show, the license fee was six million but it still only cost 3.5 million to do the show. Now WE'RE making a profit of 2.5 million an episode--split among the owners (WB, John Wells and myself). Throw in syndication, DVDs and international and it's not a bad living.
That whole lecture was to make this point. Even with the relatively low ratings of Studio 60, ad revenues far exceeded the license fee. It was Warner Bros that took a bath. Ego, however, forces me to point out that the money WB lost on S-60 didn't make much of a dent in the money they made from The West Wing and I still have my parking space.
Thanks for the question.
Aaron