• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Late Night Wars - Conan's last Tonight Show was TONIGHT a long time ago

Status
Not open for further replies.
BrandNew said:
Would we WANT him on at 11:00 though? I was under the impression that Fox did local news at 11 in larger markets...like NYC and LA, etc.

Most Fox owned stations run an hour of news at 10:00.

I have a feeling that is the likely set up they are looking for. Local news before Conan... either an hour or a syndicated show for 30 minutes and 30 minutes of news.

Remember guys: Letterman did not get all of the CBS affiliates at first either. Many of them played him really late at night. Something Kimmel is still dealing with in some markets.

Most likely if Fox signs Conan there will be many hold outs on the affiliate front that would not show it at 11.. unless Fox wants to force the issue (they supposedly have it in writing that they can with affiliates).
 
my Fox used to show Seinfeld after the news. now it shows Tmz, Access Hollywood, and Law and Order: SVU

should be easy for the affiliate to get on board!
 
My local Fox has the news at 10:00 (Actually 9 here- Central) followed by reruns of My Name Is Earl, The Andy Griffith Show, Seinfeld, and According to Jim and has been similar to that for years. Really it's a waste of a time-slot.
 
woodchuck said:
my Fox used to show Seinfeld after the news. now it shows Tmz, Access Hollywood, and Law and Order: SVU

should be easy for the affiliate to get on board!

Fox 7 is owned by Fox. Not an affiliate.

We would get CoCo straight away :D
 
From what I've read, Conan would start out at about 60-70% of Fox affiliates and then grow from there the same way Letterman did. You can best bet that if there's an affiliate in 2015 who doesn't yet have Conan (assuming he's still on the air), they will lose their affiliation. Fox will play it nice for the first couple years, but then it will really begin leaning on all affiliates to adopt the standard Fox programming, or else.
 
I'm trying to watch Letterman, and I remember why I stopped.

I guess he thinks Colt McCoy has a funny name.. and just saying it in a bad Elvis impression is funny. Over and over again.
 
conan-focusgroup.gif

Still one of my favorite gifs.
 
TheGreatDave said:
Details for foreign scum?
They're showing the episode where Conan held a focus group with old people and the old people unanimously agreed that Conan was terrible and shouldn't be on the air.
 
I don't even get the sense that Conan wants to do adult humor--its not like he's some standup comic who's used to telling dirty jokes--his comedic background is SNL, Simpsons, and Late Night. His "risque" stuff is funny because of their ridiculousness or innuendo that might lose its funniness if it were more direct.
 
Conan can't be on TV until Sept, so he should do a Vegas show. Some kind of crazy spectacle that would keep him busy and keep at least some of his crew employed.

Black-Wind said:
Yeah, why the hell did they stop that? >_>
Because they beat it into the fucking ground in two weeks. Would have been great if it came like once a month instead.
 
tokkun said:
So now that the main drama is over, what is the half life on the obnoxious 'CoCo' thing?
Buckle up, Cowboy. Coco is here to stay. In fact I just used it a few minutes ago when I posted a SWEEEET TWEEEET!
 
goldenticket said:
If he were to go to hbo or showtime it would most likely be a weekly show. Im not sure either are up for a daily show. And i think if he did that it would be until lettermans job opens up. If he goes to fox they said he would be at the timeslot they want for about 70% of their stations. But overtime as long as conan does well more will come over

6a00d83451c45669e20128770c2113970c-500wi
i like it
 
numble said:
Video chronology of Leno-Letterman feud:
http://tv.gawker.com/5456733/the-first-great-late-night-war-a-video-chronology

Starts in 1984, when Leno jokingly said this on a visit to Late Night with David Letterman:
"I've been telling the network [it doesn't need you] for 18 months."


This comment on that page is great:

So what I've learned from all this is this Late Night debacle was really a giant Butterfly Effect from Hugh Grant wanting some paid trim one night.

It's like: a British actor flaps his penis on Sunset Boulevard in 1995 and fifteen years later Conan loses the Tonight Show.
 
Agreed, I thought Twitter Tracker was hilarious from the get go. Not sure why that one got hate.

Can someone explain to me the push-pull from the affiliates and Fox in a bit more detail? If the affiliates want to stick with shitty reruns, does that mean they expect to make less money from a late night show? If so, what's the financial benefit to having a late night show anyway? The only was I can make sense out of it is if it's just a risk-reward tradeoff, where the affiliates are more risk averse than the network.

Honestly it would kind of suck if Coco was head to head vs Daily Show and Colbert.
 
Gruco said:
Agreed, I thought Twitter Tracker was hilarious from the get go. Not sure why that one got hate.

Can someone explain to me the push-pull from the affiliates and Fox in a bit more detail? If the affiliates want to stick with shitty reruns, does that mean they expect to make less money from a late night show? If so, what's the financial benefit to having a late night show anyway? The only was I can make sense out of it is if it's just a risk-reward tradeoff, where the affiliates are more risk averse than the network.

Honestly it would kind of suck if Coco was head to head vs Daily Show and Colbert.
Affiliates currently run the entire late night time slot, so advertisers pay them directly for 100% of ads that are aired. They probably also have contracts for reruns or ads that would have cancellation fees (not as important) if a Conan show were to show up.

If Fox put their own show on, advertisers pay News Corp. either 100% of ads (and News Corp. shares a cut back to the affiliates) or News Corp owns maybe 75% (random number) of ads and the affiliates can sell 25% of ads (at a higher cost than ads for reruns of old shows, if Conan's show is successful), or probably some mix of the two systems. So it is still all dependent on Conan being successful, and whether affiliates are either confident that it will make money, or are willing to stomach some short term losses to make more money in the future.
 
numble said:
Video chronology of Leno-Letterman feud:
http://tv.gawker.com/5456733/the-first-great-late-night-war-a-video-chronology

Starts in 1984, when Leno jokingly said this on a visit to Late Night with David Letterman:
"I've been telling the network [it doesn't need you] for 18 months."

Its also funny watching that Leno interview clip (the 6th video down) and Jay says its all business. The thing that is eerie is Leno basically says something similar to the whole "Dont blame Conan" remark.

"You know David has never done anything underhanded or sneaky. Its just, hey, two guys.. this is a very coveted position"
 
numble said:
Affiliates currently run the entire late night time slot, so advertisers pay them directly for 100% of ads that are aired. They probably also have contracts for reruns or ads that would have cancellation fees (not as important) if a Conan show were to show up.

If Fox put their own show on, advertisers pay News Corp. either 100% of ads (and News Corp. shares a cut back to the affiliates) or News Corp owns maybe 75% (random number) of ads and the affiliates can sell 25% of ads (at a higher cost than ads for reruns of old shows, if Conan's show is successful), or probably some mix of the two systems. So it is still all dependent on Conan being successful, and whether affiliates are either confident that it will make money, or are willing to stomach some short term losses to make more money in the future.

Could Fox offer to pay affiliates a guaranteed amount and just stomach any losses if he has a slow start?
 
KHarvey16 said:
Could Fox offer to pay affiliates a guaranteed amount and just stomach any losses if he has a slow start?
I bet theoretically anything is possible.

Here is an article from the Wall Street Journal that lays everything out:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...5013341689790182.html?mod=WSJ_hp_editorsPicks

(It's from a week ago, so there is some outdated information--for instance, the opinion of the Tribune owned-affiliates is from Jan. 12, so they might have changed their opinion on a Conan show)
 
numble said:
Affiliates currently run the entire late night time slot, so advertisers pay them directly for 100% of ads that are aired. They probably also have contracts for reruns or ads that would have cancellation fees (not as important) if a Conan show were to show up.

If Fox put their own show on, advertisers pay News Corp. either 100% of ads (and News Corp. shares a cut back to the affiliates) or News Corp owns maybe 75% (random number) of ads and the affiliates can sell 25% of ads (at a higher cost than ads for reruns of old shows, if Conan's show is successful), or probably some mix of the two systems. So it is still all dependent on Conan being successful, and whether affiliates are either confident that it will make money, or are willing to stomach some short term losses to make more money in the future.

This is a really good breakdown of the situation.

The only other thing I would throw in there is Fox's 10:00 ET problem. All other netwroks have a 10-11 ET slot that is filled with a show as a lead in to the local news.. which airs at 11:00, followed by some sort of late night news or talk show at 11:35. Fox wants Conan to air at 11:00 opposite the other local news. This might be a great counter-programming strategy to get people to at least watch the front half of Conan who don't want to watch local news.

Fox doesn't have any 10PM shows which means the affiliates are all off doing their own thing starting at 10PM. If they want to have a local news cast (most will), they will essentially be forced to run it at 10:00 for an hour or at 10:30 for 30 minutes. Many Fox affiliates want their local news to run at 11:00 opposite the other local news stations.

I'm rambling here, but the point is Conan would have a very unstable lead in which could really hurt his ratings.. some markets might have strong lead ins.. but I'm not sure an hour of local news is going to be a great lead in. Think the Jay Leno Show problem x1000
 
StoOgE said:
I'm rambling here, but the point is Conan would have a very unstable lead in which could really hurt his ratings.. some markets might have strong lead ins.. but I'm not sure an hour of local news is going to be a great lead in. Think the Jay Leno Show problem x1000

Looking at it nationally, I think FOX Primetime programming -> 1hr local news -> Conan is a muuuuch better lead-in than 1hr Leno -> 30mins local news -> Conan
 
Personifried said:
Looking at it nationally, I think FOX Primetime programming -> 1hr local news -> Conan is a muuuuch better lead-in than 1hr Leno -> 30mins local news -> Conan

There are a lot of people who simply don't care about the news. I can see a lot of people switching over form other newtorks at 11:00 to watch Conan's show after their 10:00 dramas are finished.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom