2 ms·
Quality is subjective. What you presumably mean is "fewer, but more expensive" originals. You have to remember that a lot of cheap TV makes money. Sure, not ma
by nitwit005 4y ago
Quality is subjective. What you presumably mean is "fewer, but more expensive" originals.
You have to remember that a lot of cheap TV makes money. Sure, not many people may watch it, but that doesn't matter if it's cheap enough to make. That's the premise of a lot of the terrible reality TV you see.
The same principle applies to movies. The ideal film isn't another Star Wars or Avatar; it's the Blair Witch Project. It cost tens of thousands to make, but grossed almost $250 million globally.
You may notice that Netflix has a bunch of zombie movies and things. Horror films are generally cheap to make, and horror fans are a reliable audience.
- jjeaff 4y agoI remember a specific case of this happening with a popular CBS tv show "The Unit". I thought it was quite good. Apparently a lot of other people did too because it was one of their most popular shows. But it was cancelled after 3 seasons and replaced with another garbage reality tv show like Jersey Shore, the Kardashians or Survivor or something. The reason was that the Unit filmed in different locations and had lots of explosions and other things that made it expensive to film. They decided they could replace it with a show one third as popular that had 1/20th the production cost. From a business perspective, you can charge one third as much for ads and still come out way ahead because reality garbage costs nothing to make.
- ipaddr 4y agoScorpion was cancelled with a 10+ rating while shows like the Conners limp on with 1 rating. The slot (night/time/length), demo rating, genre can have a huge impact but cost can be important. "The unit" was cancelled with 9 million viewers after peaking at 16 a few years before. The problem was the average age of a person to watching was 55.