On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Tom Wolper <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Breach of contract is relevant only if this ends up in court. Neither > side wants that so it would take a meltdown of negotiations to force > the issue there and result in PR devastation for both Conan and NBC. > > The current contract has failed both sides and both sides will either > negotiate a new contract to keep Conan at 12:05 (probably with a lot > more money and a rock solid date for succession) or they will > negotiate Conan's exit from NBC. The clauses in the current contract > that need a court to enforce, like non-compete, will be dealt with in > these negotiations. > I don't think that is quite right. If Conan can convince NBC that he has a plausible legal case, it will strengthen his negotiating position. Thus the break of contract issue is relevant even if they never wind up in court. Conan wants to make the point that even though the contract does not specific an 11:35 start time, the history of the show constitutes a good faith understanding of the contract that the show will start at 11:35. If this is seen as a credible claim, NBC will pay Conan some fraction of the millions (50?) they would owe if they were breaching the contract. I don't see any space here for Conan to ever agree to do the show at 12:05, no matter how much they pay him. From the point further either NBC caves, they pay off Coco, or kiss off Coco (perhaps ending up in court).
-- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
