Will programming created for streaming networks stay exclusive to that network forever or eventually be aired/made available elsewhere? Pay tv channels (eg HBO, Showtime) sometimes allowed shows exclusive to them be sold (after editing) into syndication. Will Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+, etc eventually allow viewing of their shows elsewhere or if you never subscribe to Amazon Prime or Netflix will you never see the content created for AP or Netflix?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Streaming shows to OTA or cable
- Thread starter Larry
- Start date
Depends on the deal. If a producer of a show signs an exclusive to Amazon or Netflix, it stays for the length of the deal. One of the problems the TV networks have is they usually only get a few plays of a show before the rights revert to the producer. But I get the sense that because the streaming channels are also investors in their shows, and own a piece, they get to say how long the show stays on that platform. But ultimately the rights will revert to the producers and they'll want to keep milking the value of that show. So they'll seek out other places, to reach different audiences, and make even more money. Once again, depending on the deal, if a streaming channel has syndication rights, they could be the ones to take those shows to other places. That way they get paid by their competitors. I could easily see Amazon selling DVDs of their shows. That makes lots of sense.
That's an excellent question. Disney owns ABC and has an existing syndication arm (Disney-ABC Domestic Television). The same is true of Peacock (NBC Universal) and Paramount+ (CBS Television Studios).
But, to my knowledge, Amazon Prime and Netflix don't have in-house syndication divisions, so they would have to cut individual deals.
The question is whether there's a business case to be made for selling what are largely limited-run series. The old standard for a broadcast network show being syndicated was to have at least 100 episodes produced. At Netflix, the longest-running series are GRACE AND FRANKIE at 94 episodes, ORANGE IS THE NEW BLACK at 91 episodes, THE RANCH at 80 episodes, BOJACK HORSEMAN at 77 episodes, FULLER HOUSE at 75 episodes and HOUSE OF CARDS at 73 episodes.
Dramas tend not to do well in syndication, so GRACE AND FRANKIE, BOJACK HORSEMAN and FULLER HOUSE would seem to have the most potential, but, again, there aren't many episodes. I wouldn't hold my breath.
All it takes is money, and they have lots of it.
But do they want to? Or do they want to keep the programming exclusive to them forever (or almost forever?)
from say Disney+ or Paramount+ to prime time network?
Probably not, but then again they need to fill 3 hours a night 7 nights a week with something.
Limited length series of short runs are possible, look at The Old Man. IIRC there are 7 episodes that have aired and a similar second season on order.
For them to go into syndication the general rule is you need 100 Episodes in the can or the guarantee of 100 episodes to get a syndication deal. Young Sheldon was into syndication with less than 100 in the can, but they knew there would be more in the pipeline.
They have to fill all the cable, streaming and OTA channels with something..... but reality, talent, cooking and similar shows are unscripted and cheap to make having no WGA payments to make.
If you want proof of the lack of available programming to the affiliates, look at how many more hours of local news there are on your network affiliate. When I was young it was an hour at 6:00P and into the Network National News at 7:00, today it the local news starts at 430 AM and runs til 10A and comes back at 3P til 7
Probably not, but then again they need to fill 3 hours a night 7 nights a week with something.
Limited length series of short runs are possible, look at The Old Man. IIRC there are 7 episodes that have aired and a similar second season on order.
For them to go into syndication the general rule is you need 100 Episodes in the can or the guarantee of 100 episodes to get a syndication deal. Young Sheldon was into syndication with less than 100 in the can, but they knew there would be more in the pipeline.
They have to fill all the cable, streaming and OTA channels with something..... but reality, talent, cooking and similar shows are unscripted and cheap to make having no WGA payments to make.
If you want proof of the lack of available programming to the affiliates, look at how many more hours of local news there are on your network affiliate. When I was young it was an hour at 6:00P and into the Network National News at 7:00, today it the local news starts at 430 AM and runs til 10A and comes back at 3P til 7
Read the two paragraphs that follow the one you quoted.
The proliferation of local news is less about the availability of syndicated programming and more about the cost. An extra half-hour, hour or more of local news is very cheap to produce—-generally just a re-purposing or outright replay of work and content the station is already paying for.
Also, while it's often easy to find older episodes of shows and series from Network TV either via the On-Demand portal of your cable or satellite provider or on the internet (even major sporting events or PPV events once they've aired), it seems that Netflix, Amazon and similar services with original content have things pretty well locked down and if you wish to see their content, you pay for their service. Same with stuff they advertise on streaming sites like Discovery+. You might find some older episodes of some series from HGTV or Discovery here and there, or snippets of those series on sites like YouTube that were posted by the license holder, but they seem to keep a tight lid on even bootleg websites showing their content. They seem to be quite serious about their business model and the fact if you want content, you must subscribe to their streaming service to view it - as it should be!
There are cost issues with doing that (assuming you let those titles be accessed). That’s what’s behind the recent cull of content at HBO Max. This is a good explainer:
Here's why HBO Max is pulling dozens of films and TV series from the streaming platform
HBO Max is pulling 36 TV shows and movies to cut costs and shift its strategy.
Great example—-essentially AMC’s model since BREAKING BAD premiered, original series with a limited number of episodes per season.
But what’s the syndication play for that? Who buys it and why?
Maybe Amazon/Netflix et al. YouTube channels after streaming numbers for shows decline, Streaming content owners could sell all the ads and cut out the middleman (i. e. broadcast TV) yet make their content available to non-subscribers and in a form (contentwise - edited the way the cable originated New Outer Limits was for ad supports broadcast TV [in this case, Comet TV] - certain words silenced and some parts of some scenes blurred out) that advertisers would want to be associated with.
Kirk Bayne
Kirk Bayne
I thought that nowadays, the "magic number" for a prime time network show to have it's reruns be syndicated is four full seasons.
Depending on how many episodes get produced over that span, it's anywhere between 88 and 104 total episodes (or between 22 and 26 episodes per season).
It's repetitive and virtually useless. Sort of like a newspaper that prints only the headlines.
For instance, I just read today a story online about our useless governor signing into law making the legal marriage age 16. Do you think I've ever seen anything about that on the networks or Faux? Not a word. However we are fully informed about every stabbing, car crash and house fire in the whole metro area.
What a waste of time and electricity!
Because he did it four years ago.
Gov. Ducey signs bill creating minimum Arizona marriage age
Arizona has become the latest state to prohibit some child marriages under a bill signed by Gov. Doug Ducey preventing anyone younger than 16 from getting hitched.
Apparently the problem was that teenage girls were marrying much older men.
Say what you will about FOX10, @landtuna —-at least they’re not reporting news from 2018.Because he did it four years ago.
Gov. Ducey signs bill creating minimum Arizona marriage age
Arizona has become the latest state to prohibit some child marriages under a bill signed by Gov. Doug Ducey preventing anyone younger than 16 from getting hitched.www.kvoa.com
Apparently the problem was that teenage girls were marrying much older men.
BigA, some of this was an issue because of the FLDS enclave near the Utah border, where polygamy was practiced as recently as 2017 and girls as young as 14 were being forcibly married to church elders as old as their 80s.
Another strike against online journalism - No mention of the time frame. Didn't hear about this 4 years ago either.Because he did it four years ago.
Gov. Ducey signs bill creating minimum Arizona marriage age
Arizona has become the latest state to prohibit some child marriages under a bill signed by Gov. Doug Ducey preventing anyone younger than 16 from getting hitched.
Apparently the problem was that teenage girls were marrying much older men.
And girls marrying older men is an ancient 'tradition'. Again, no mention of why this is suddenly so important. I've certainly heard about 'December romances' but it is much more common couples just go on the run and don't bother to get married first.
And, KVOA is in Tucson, not Tempe where I live. There's a 9,000 foot mountain between there and here. If KVOA has its antenna on top of Mt Bigelo it would be facing the city of Tucson and not northwest (up here). Last time I scanned I did not receive any Tucson TV stations.
About FOX10 - I don't quite agree. They spent most of last week's 'news' on the life of Queen Elizabeth. Not her death but her entire life. As did the 3 networks and their local puppets.
FLDS is a cult, not a bonifide church. You can contact their 'leader' (Warren Jeffs). He'll keep the appointment....because he's in jail.
And last I heard the local cops in the FLDS did not enforce the new law. Don't know quite the situation. AZ should have titled that community to Utah.
Tuna---damn near every online story has a date on it.
As to why setting a minimum age for marriage is "suddenly" so important---I think it's one of those things that most people aren't aware of. They conflate the local age of consent with the age at which someone can marry. Groups like Equality Now have been raising awareness, and Arizona four years ago was just one of the states to respond:
I can't speak for Big A, but I assume he just linked the first story about Gov. Ducey signing the bill that he found, and that it was from KVOA.
Since that seems to matter, here's the story from your local NBC affiliate, KPNX in Phoenix (though both it and the one from KVOA are the same article as written by the Associated Press):
Gov. Ducey signs bill creating minimum Arizona marriage age
The bill is intended to prevent abuse and manipulation of minors.
www.12news.com
Last edited:
I agree that coverage of the Queen's passing, which is a legitimate global news story, should have been scaled back after the first few hours in the USA. There are important stories, local, regional, national and worldwide, that are not getting coverage because we're still wall-to-wall on the Queen, may she Rest In Peace.
I know what FLDS is. My point to Big A was that the child marriage bill was going through the Legislature prior to the apparent collapse of the FLDS control over the government and people of Colorado City, Arizona. While polygamy is illegal in and of itself it the state of Arizona, a law establishing a minimum age for marriage could also give authorities one more tool, should they have needed it.
- Status