Yeah, it is really complicated, and for all the shade we throw at Zas I do begin to understand that a lot of his decisions make financial sense.
But it also seems that he does not value the HBO brand accurately. Let’s say Westworld costs him $1M a year to keep on the shelf available for streaming (no idea if that is a wild under or over estimate). Even if it does not generate enough actual hours of viewing to offset the $1M, it seems to me that a number of people subscribe to HBO because it is the kind of place where shows like Westworld are available. I may never watch Euphoria, but it’s existence and buzz probably enhances the subjective value of my HBO subscription. Now, Westworld is low hanging fruit in the prestige television genre, and given how far it fell in terms of both substance and perception, I doubt it will have much lasting impact in and of itself. But if it starts happening to shows that still have the bloom on their rose… There was a time when I spent X number of dollars/year on boxed DVD sets of television shows I liked. As streaming appeared we made a conscious decision to stop buying DVDs, and put that money into streaming. For the most part this has been a good decision, but it becomes less good if I lose confidence that certain programs will be available. I happen to have the Sopranos box set, but if I didn’t, and paid for HBO in part so I could watch Sopranos whenever I felt like it, I would find my HBO/Max/Discovery subscription was a lot less valuable if Sopranos suddenly disappeared; even more so if it then popped up for free on some Discovery-Tubi service. Now perhaps even Zas would never dump Sopranos, but if his decisions with lesser shows erodes confidence that he is committed to the stability of trademark programming, I think he runs the risk of alienating long term subscribers. On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 7:51 AM Adam Bowie <[email protected]> wrote: > What I hadn't really appreciated until the Zas regime arrived, is the > ongoing costs that a lot of these shows (and films) have just being listed > on the service. > > Historically it made sense that channels/streamers paid on a limited time > licencing basis to air a show. The rights to Friends went to Netflix for > $100m a year or whatever. When those rights expire, Warners could shop the > show to the next customer. And of course, the show was created in a time > when the various creatives on the show got percentages of all those rights. > So even with the show now on HBO Max in the US (it's still on Netflix in > the UK), they have to pay to keep it there in accordance with all those > original contracts. There was that case with Bones a few years back when > Fox was found guilty of essentially self-dealing on the licencing fees it > charged for the show, letting Hulu get it cheaply and therefore leaving the > creatives who were due a share of sales being under-recompensed. > > But in more recent times, a streamer usually just buys out the entirety of > a show's rights. Netflix owns 100% of Stranger Things for as long as they > want it. The various production companies involved got paid at the start > (or over 36 months as we recently learned), and that's their lot. Maybe > they negotiated some kind of bonus system with Netflix if the show achieves > certain goals. Who knows? But in essence, that initial payment is their > lot. And this makes a lot of sense for Netflix who needs a catalogue that > isn't reliant on shows that might fly to another service if someone writes > a cheque big enough. There was a recent report ( > https://www.ampereanalysis.com/insight/netflix-originals-and-exclusives-now-the-majority-of-its-us-catalogue#:~:text=Under%20current%20growth%20rates%2C%2075,50%25%20threshold%20by%20Q4%202022.) > that Netflix Originals and Exclusives (not the same thing!) had reached 50% > of their catalogue in the US. Nirvana for them would surely be owning a > show like Friends or The Office with upwards of ten seasons, and hundreds > of hours, but which they don't have to pay another dime to hang onto. > They've not really got that yet - maybe The Ranch was something they hoped > might fit the bill? I managed one episode, but they made 80! > > Given the way HBO has behaved in the past, for the most part holding on > tightly to its shows so that they don't go elsewhere, I'd imagined that > they bought out quite a lot of their shows' rights at the start. Yes, The > Sopranos and Sex and the City ended up on other channels for periods of > time, but you could always get them on HBO/HBO Go/HBO Max/HBO Whatever. And > it was HBO's choice to licence them out. So beyond the actual streaming > costs, I'd thought that there would be no additional cost to them serving > those shows. But I'm not sure that's true. > > Recent events suggest that in many cases, there are fees payable for > keeping shows in the HBO Max catalogue - either ongoing licencing fees to > hang onto them even when they were HBO/HBO Max shows from the outset, or > fees payable to the production studio/creatives/whoever when you stream an > episode. Otherwise there'd be no point to removing shows even when they're > cancelled. > > I suspect that in truth this is a complex area with some long-term, but > perhaps not exclusive deals. Each show might have subtly different rights > associated with it. Maybe HBO agreed to pay Martin Scorcese an annual fee > to keep Vinyl on the service, just because of who he is. Then, when it's > streamed by three people a year or whatever, they decide that fee is no > longer worthwhile. > > And things change over time. At the start Netflix just *licenced *House > of Cards. It aired on other channels around the world in territories where > Netflix didn't exist at the time. Who knows whether Netflix will at some > point lose the rights to it globally? > > Anyway, I was just listening to The Vergecast team reading the runes on > the fate of the various streaming services. I don't necessarily agree with > all their calls, but it's an interesting listen: > https://www.theverge.com/the-vergecast > > Julia Alexander on the Downstream podcast (and Puck) is also well worth a > listen: https://www.relay.fm/downstream > > > Adam > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 3:06 PM Mark Jeffries <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I would guess that "Curb" would be safe. In the case of "Larry Sanders," >> Sony owns the show and if WBD ever lets the license run out, they'll sell >> it to another pay streamer. >> >> Mark Jeffries >> [email protected] >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 12:51 AM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I’m just catching up to this. Westworld getting the Zas treatment is >>> surprising. Not that it got cancelled (I think I got through the second >>> season, but maybe not I got so bored and no longer recall), but it was a >>> prestige show at one point. Are they going to take down Deadwood or The >>> Wire at some point? Larry Sanders or Curb Your Enthusiasm? >>> >>> Most surprising, Deadline suggests that the explanation lies in Zas >>> wanting to use Westworld to start his own FAST (Free Ad Supported Streaming >>> Television) outlet. Of course FAST is a natural for the Discovery brand, >>> but Westworld, especially Season 1, seems less well suited for that than, >>> say Mythbusters. >>> >>> >>> https://deadline.com/2022/12/westworld-the-nevers-pulled-hbo-max-canceled-1235197233/ >>> >>> >>> On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 at 2:34 AM Adam Bowie <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> (Snip) I see that WBD is busily cancelling and pulling lots of stuff >>>> off its service. So not only is S5 of Westworld still cancelled by S1-4 are >>>> being pulled off HBO Max. Meanwhile The Nevers is never going to air the >>>> second part of its first season - well at least not on HBO Max. Sad to see >>>> that Love Life has been canned too, as I liked that show. >>>> >>>> >>>> Adam >>>> >>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 1:01 AM 'Bob Jersey' via TVorNotTV < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Found this only to note that Zas budget cuts forced the canning of >>>>> *Minx* despite a renewal... Lionsgate was given back the complete >>>>> series to offer to other providers... >>>>> >>>>> https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/minx-canceled-hbo-max-season-2-1235458073/ >>>>> (link) >>>>> B >>>>> >>>>> Moi, March 11th: >>>>> >>>>>> ...and going "tit for tat" with male nudity on the HBOmax series that >>>>>> could have ended up on Peacock (how fitting)... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/minx-creator-on-male-nudity-feminism-1235108876/ >>>>>> (link) >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/bc71814f-3188-450d-8f24-9e42f412b5ban%40googlegroups.com >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/bc71814f-3188-450d-8f24-9e42f412b5ban%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGCcUh-R3oR7x0cKZjkPmLyc3aUZP%3DcumwEF%2BGqqk2KmLg%40mail.gmail.com >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGCcUh-R3oR7x0cKZjkPmLyc3aUZP%3DcumwEF%2BGqqk2KmLg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- >>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkY%2B9hB84HRWk-o3AoJ31Mfo5Jf1T1Uo_%3D6xz67XGu5m3dQ%40mail.gmail.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkY%2B9hB84HRWk-o3AoJ31Mfo5Jf1T1Uo_%3D6xz67XGu5m3dQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TVorNotTV" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAJ_uKi8StOxH8VdorQ971kx2iKVPnT%3Dx9omfnNJCFFLRT_dP%3DA%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAJ_uKi8StOxH8VdorQ971kx2iKVPnT%3Dx9omfnNJCFFLRT_dP%3DA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGBzyJ_%3DxXqvSxsoussgP%2B4U-7zf9CQntNs8jYkkPeQfCQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGBzyJ_%3DxXqvSxsoussgP%2B4U-7zf9CQntNs8jYkkPeQfCQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- Sent from Gmail Mobile -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYK1g%2BGsmQAFKGzNStqXY6WHvu7WSyWNa%2BXc5zZjjmb3Yw%40mail.gmail.com.
