
What if TV Networks Aired All Their Pilots? - robg
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/what-if-tv-networks-aired-all-their-pilots/
======
azanar
I think the economic analysis of this is incomplete.

There is more to the cost of airing a pilot than just the production cost of
the pilot, and this even assumes the network has agreed to assume the cost of
that.

There is the cost of lining up advertisers for the commercial breaks during,
before, and after the pilot.

There is the displacement of the show(s) that would've otherwise filled the
time-slot the pilot occupies.

There is the opportunity cost of the advertisers you might have lined up if
you hadn't punted the incumbent for the pilot.

The more pilots you elect to air, the more often you have to make these trade-
offs. If there are a sufficient number of incumbents that can be thoughtlessly
traded for pilots like this, I'd wonder about the general program management
of the network, and how long they've been allowing things to stagnate.

Even if you just sacrificed a week, that is a _huge_ amount of potential
revenue to sacrifice for the sake of picking the "right" set of shows.

And, even if all the economics for airing every pilot works out, it still
doesn't guarantee much. You are still gathering data based on what people say
they might want to watch based on a snapshot. I can't imagine this is going to
be particularly predictive of a series's performance. This seems similar to
someone taking a vote on whether a movie sequel ought to be produced from an
audience who had just seen the original; I can see far more people asking for
that many Scary Movie sequels as actually went to see them.

~~~
thwarted
Most of the lack of space and time to show these would be solved by offering
them for free via On Demand; or on YouTube and hulu, both of which have
advertising platforms that would consider this remnant ad inventory.

~~~
joezydeco
If you take it off the broadcast net, doesn't that eliminate the whole
"American Idol" aspect of the idea where people watch together and then vote?

If you make it homework ("watch every one of these shows by friday!"), you've
lost the public.

~~~
thwarted
Huh? Pilots are already not necessarily shown to the general public via
broadcast television. Making them more easily available via the internet can
only serve to increase their exposure. No one is requiring anyone to watch
these like "homework", just like consuming any possible entertainment isn't
"homework". If they are available via On Demand for free, then people can
watch them just like they watch other shows.

~~~
joezydeco
Did you _read_ the article?

"What if a network devoted one week, maybe in early summertime, to airing all
its pilots for the fall season, with viewers voting on their favorites? You
turn your otherwise failed pilots into content for a weeklong American Idol-
style competition"

~~~
thwarted
I read all _three_ of the paragraphs in the "article". Note that my original
response was in the context of azanar's comment, about the economics of doing
what is suggested in the OP.

------
prawn
There'd be a hell of a lot more petitions to "Bring back x!"

Every pilot, now matter how ridiculously niche, would attract some grouping of
die-hards creating petitions, fan-fiction, costumes and more.

'Please reconsider your decision to cancel Large-Nostril Boris, an excellent
character representing all of us with above-average nasal volume and providing
hope to everyone around the world. Sign on if you agree, or read my Boris fan-
fic here!'

~~~
dcx
You say that like it's a bad thing, but couldn't you then determine the
profitable niche segments and run with those? It's getting cheaper and cheaper
to make a show. And distribution isn't limited to TV channels - online, DVD...
That fits pretty well into the overall trend of the internet resulting in deep
specialisation.

------
zende
just throw them all on Hulu and collect direct metrics. why on earth would you
have people vote or rely on Nielsen? each view is a vote, and there is no
limit of time-slots on Hulu

~~~
patio11
It is highly non-obvious to me that the demographics who use Hulu and the
demographics advertisers pay $$$ to reach are the same demographics.

~~~
sorbus
Advertisers do pay to reach demographics on Hulu - just look at all the
advertisement breaks in videos on Hulu. The problem is that there is no
distinction between Hulu users who also watch Television and Hulu users who do
not watch television; this compounds the problem of not knowing if the Hulu
users who watch Television are a sufficiently representative sample of
Television viewers to predict whether a show would succeed.

Which is probably what you meant, but your phrasing was (to me) a bit off.

~~~
notahacker
The other problem is that people that watch shows online might not even
consider watching the same show on television even if they're avid TV viewers.
For example people who flock to "OMG this pilot is hilarious!!!" links on
social media when bored probably aren't going to watch the series during prime
time

------
il
<http://channel101.com/> has been doing this for years, resulting in some
incredibly creative, if short lived, shows.

------
nazgulnarsil
the class of people who filter pilots will resist strongly.

BTW this would work even better if there was a futures market in the success
of all these trial pilots. one person = one vote is a fairly primitive and
inefficient system.

~~~
dwwoelfel
"one person = one vote is a fairly primitive and inefficient system."

In this case, it is much more efficient than letting the viewers vote on the
show. The handful of executives make their vote based on long-range criteria.
They want a show that has staying power, is attractive to both advertisers and
viewers, and fits in with the rest of their lineup.

The viewers aren't as savvy. Their vote will be based on how much they like a
single episode. Viewers only see one side, they don't care about how much
money the network can make from advertising.

The people picking the shows should be the people who can balance the needs of
the viewers with those of the network. Those people are the executives.

~~~
nazgulnarsil
instead of a counter-point, you're making a completely different point. the
point here is prediction. networks want to be able to predict which shows will
do well so they can draw advertising dollars. to do this they hire people whom
they think will be able to make this prediction. It is unlikely, however, that
these people can do better than a prediction market.

------
gojomo
Years ago I once participated in a focus group for some early sitcom pilots.
The shows had recognizable actors, but were really rough -- in production
values, in line delivery and pacing, etc.

I never saw the shows we watched become actual series -- but if they had, the
pilots would have had to have been refilmed to reach broadcast quality. So
that might prove a barrier to opening up the unaired pilots -- while they're
called 'pilots', they're not yet what audiences expect of a 'series premiere'.

Even if they've got potential, the participants might be embarrassed to have
their rough form available to the public. Also, it might prove harder to
tinker with the premise once fans develop -- swapping an actor or changing a
character could generate an online backlash before episode one.

------
njharman
> What if a network devoted one week, maybe in early summertime, to airing all
> its pilots for the fall season

How dinosaurish. Flippin put them all online. Youtube will pick up hosting
bill and even track how often they are viewed for you. I'm assuming air time
is too valuable and limited to waste is why a "handful of TV executives" send
2/3rds of piolets to /dev/null

------
gregparadee
I for one would love this. Even if they just did it online for people to
watch. It would provide a great way to get feedback on shows and would just
lead to the networks making more money. It amazes me how shows like Burn
Notice end up on TNT because network execs didn't think that it would be a
good show.

------
cubicle67
Tell you what I'd like better - What if TV networks made public the scripts
etc for shows that have been canceled. Nothing worse than getting involved in
a series only to have it canceled at the end of the season (or prior). It's be
great to be able to see what was planned and where the story was headed

~~~
culled
I don't think that most canceled shows have many unproduced scripts (The
Critic is one exception). Even if the writers know where the story was going
a) getting an explanation that's just a few paragraphs isn't as satisfying as
actually seeing the conclusion. b) some writers may not want to let people
know what they had in store (Joss Whedon with Firefly for instance) and the
ones that are willing to reveal what was planned are already doing that for
their canceled shows.

------
philwelch
I think you could take a step beyond this, and use the performance of those
pilots to judge whether or not to continue borderline shows like Law & Order
or to dump them in favor of a promising pilot.

