On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 2:06 PM, David Lynch <[email protected]> wrote:
> Here's what I don't understand, assuming this is true: How in the > world does Zucker expect to keep Conan locked down for three and a > half years if NBC entered into a contract with someone else to host > "The Tonight Show" while he was still under a contract that guaranteed > him the same thing and still showing up to produce five shows a week > without having definitively said (at least in public) that he was > quitting? That "People of Earth" statement was more an ultimatum than > a resignation - it kept using terms like "consider" when it came to > leaving Tonight. > > I have a hard time seeing any judge or jury siding with NBC after that > move, even if the timeslot argument ends up not holding much water. This is probably why NBC is denying the TMZ report. I suspect they mean that they have reached an agreement for him to do an 11:35 program (which they had to do, since his previous contract specificed a 10:00 show), but this agreement probably does not formally call for the 11:35 program to be called "The Tonight Show". Even NBC is not that stupid. If they signed Leno to host the Tonight Show now, when Conan has not formally resigned from the Tonight Show, then NBC would be in clear breech of the contract and would owe Coco 60M dollars. I don't see Leno being the Host of The Tonight Show unless and until Conan formally resigns, or refuses to show up for work to host teh 12:05 Tonight Show.
-- 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
