# Redundant channels & Programming



## Terry K (Sep 13, 2006)

I've been flipping through the D* guide and notice more and more the same crap showing up on every channel. For example, I found Cheers in my guide on no less than 4 channels (Reelz(?), Hallmark, HDNet, and WGN)

That 70s show on Nick Teen and ABC Family.

Golden Girls on 2 channels (Hallmark & We)

Walker Texas Ranger making the rounds of WGN and CLOO, AT THE SAME TIME! 
now A&E's brand of reality crap is showing up on lifetime, and let's not mention how many channels have Roseanne reruns.

Why do I need 300 channels if they're all airing the same damn shows? Havent the idiots running <your favorite cable channel> figured out yet that they need to have something unique instead of shows that are already airing somewhere else?

(None of the shows I've listed are airing on *related* networks either!)

On a side note its kinda refreshing not to find the Simpsons on ANY cable network!


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

Terry K said:


> On a side note its kinda refreshing not to find the Simpsons on ANY cable network!


It's only a matter of time. My guess is The Simpson's will show up on cable (and numerous outlets at that) somewhere around 5 years after the show ends.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

I've noticed even Planet Green and Animal Planet are starting to become "All Paranormal, Almost All the Time", with the same shows that Travel and Bio used to run into the ground every week. In fact I think there's only one episode of Paranormal Cops that gets run 5 times a week on 5 different channels.


----------



## Terry K (Sep 13, 2006)

fluffybear said:


> It's only a matter of time. My guess is The Simpson's will show up on cable (and numerous outlets at that) somewhere around 5 years after the show ends.


It just seems odd that COPS and shows that have been around just as long have already made it to cable, but the Simpsons haven't made it yet. The producers of the Simpsons must be really smart guys to keep it off cable. (Remember what Alan Alda did about MASH...he sued FOX to get it off of fX, which was the ALL MASH all Day network.)


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

Terry K said:


> It just seems odd that COPS and shows that have been around just as long have already made it to cable, but the Simpsons haven't made it yet. The producers of the Simpsons must be really smart guys to keep it off cable. (Remember what Alan Alda did about MASH...he sued FOX to get it off of fX, which was the ALL MASH all Day network.)


Technically, 20th Century Fox owns the show and I suspect are the ones responsible for keeping it off cable. Right now, the show commands top dollar in the syndication marketplace thanks to the fact it is exclusive. In some markets, re-runs of The Simpson's is the #1 show in their time period and even beats local news.


----------



## Glen_D (Oct 21, 2006)

Terry K said:


> I've been flipping through the D* guide and notice more and more the same crap showing up on every channel. For example, I found Cheers in my guide on no less than 4 channels (Reelz(?), Hallmark, HDNet, and WGN)
> 
> That 70s show on Nick Teen and ABC Family.
> 
> ...


That's been my pet peeve for some time now.

A few years ago, I did a search of some random TV show titles on my DVR, shows that I knew currently aired on more than one channel, and found a number of shows that had 50-100 screenings per week. Those were channels that I subscribed to in my satellite package, including my locals. And I think the syndicated TV shows aired by local stations in my market have pretty much all been airing on one or more major Cable/satellite channels concurrently for the past several years.

I'm sure it all boils down to money, but I have to wonder, how many people are watching these shows, when other channels are also running the same ones? It really dilutes the potential viewing audience. Are the channels really pulling in much advertising revenue from all these redundant programs & episodes?


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

Glen_D said:


> I'm sure it all boils down to money, but I have to wonder, how many people are watching these shows, when other channels are also running the same ones? It really dilutes the potential viewing audience. Are the channels really pulling in much advertising revenue from all these redundant programs & episodes?


It would not surprise me to learn that a number of these shows are being offered as "Barter" (a number of commercial spots during the broadcast are given to the syndicator in exchange for the rights to carry the show). Typically, it ranges somewhere between 2:30 or 4:00 depending on the show's popularity. When you do barter (& especially when you air PPI - paid per inquiry commercials), you want your program airing program (and commercial) airing as many places and times as you can.


----------



## rkr0923 (Sep 14, 2006)

What got me was last Wednesday I recorded Ceremony on UHD, then I saw it advertised on for PPV for 6.99 lol


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

rkr0923 said:


> What got me was last Wednesday I recorded Ceremony on UHD, then I saw it advertised on for PPV for 6.99 lol


That's for those who missed it or do not subscribe to HD Extra Pack and receive HDNET Movies.


----------



## rkr0923 (Sep 14, 2006)

Only reason I got it extra pack is free this past week. Would never pay 10 bucks for that crap. Only recorded it for Uma, couldn't finish it lol.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

rkr0923 said:


> Only reason I got it extra pack is free this past week. Would never pay 10 bucks for that crap. Only recorded it for Uma, couldn't finish it lol.


It's $5, not $10. It's also available for 3 months free online.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

Hmmmm.... why would I watch a program in syndication when I can own the entire series nowadays on DVD or BluRay? 

Oh, should I mention that the evening syndicated programming happens to be 30 minutes long, making it easier to slot than hour long programming? What do they do? Run two episodes back to back or as part of a sandwich.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

Mark Holtz said:


> Hmmmm.... why would I watch a program in syndication when I can own the entire series nowadays on DVD or BluRay?
> .


the first reason which comes to mind is money. A very large segment of the population does not have enough disposable income to warrant purchasing their favorite shows on DVD or BluRay.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

fluffybear said:


> the first reason which comes to mind is money. A very large segment of the population does not have enough disposable income to warrant purchasing their favorite shows on DVD or BluRay.


But, you can rent the disks through NetFlix if you want. How much is NetFlix again?

I also check out the pricing of older releases of TV series on DVD such as M*A*S*H, Seinfeld, Buffy, I Love Lucy, Angel, Two and a Half Men, the CSIs, Criminal Minds, and yes, even Lost. The cost of an entire season was around $25-$30, and some of the CSIs were below $20. The exception was the Star Treks, which were much higher. The advantage of seeing the shows on DVD verses in syndication is that the syndicated version can cut out footage in order to add more commercials.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

I say they just drop all channel names, logos and other identifiers and just list the programming schedule by Channel Number.

Golden Girls might be on channels, 127, 185 and 243 while That 70's Show is on channels 134, 168 and 257.

'Course that means the logo bug in the corner of the screen changes too. Or even better yet, goes away entirely.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

Mark Holtz said:


> But, you can rent the disks through NetFlix if you want. How much is NetFlix again?


Yes, Netflix is inexpensive but you do not own the series with NetFlix. Since we were discussing ownership of shows on DVD or BluRay versus Syndication, I did not see it fit to address a service such as Netflix 



Mark Holtz said:


> I also check out the pricing of older releases of TV series on DVD such as M*A*S*H, Seinfeld, Buffy, I Love Lucy, Angel, Two and a Half Men, the CSIs, Criminal Minds, and yes, even Lost. The cost of an entire season was around $25-$30, and some of the CSIs were below $20. The exception was the Star Treks, which were much higher.


A show which ran 8 seasons and sells for $20 a season would be $160. That may be just a little much for some to shell out in order to watch reruns of their favorite TV series. While I personally do own many of my favorite series on DVD. If Mrs. Fluffybear & I were making what the average couple does today and given a choice between owning 8 seasons of MASH (a favorite of mine) on DVD or spending that same $160 on my wife & kids, I don't have to tell you what I would choose.



Mark Holtz said:


> The advantage of seeing the shows on DVD verses in syndication is that the syndicated version can cut out footage in order to add more commercials.


Yes, there are many benefits to watching a series on DVD.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

If you watch the rotations of sales on Amazon, you can find complete seasons or sometimes even complete series for very cheap.

I got two seasons of ole Sledge (<<<<<<< over there) for $14/ea and two seasons of "The Pretender" for about $15/ea on a buy one/get one free sale.

I've also found full seasons on sale in stores for under $10.


----------



## camo (Apr 15, 2010)

rkr0923 said:


> Only reason I got it extra pack is free this past week. Would never pay 10 bucks for that crap. Only recorded it for Uma, couldn't finish it lol.


As pointed out its 5 dollars and the best value for the buck direct offers. I love most of the channels offered in the extra pack.
With the exception of Hallmark Movie Channel and Crime & Investigation HD the rest I watch 60% of the time. HDNet Movies, MGM HD, Palladia HD, Sony Movie Channel HD, Smithsonian HD and Universal HD.

Just shows how diverse peoples viewing habits are.


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

fluffybear said:


> ... and given a choice between owning 8 seasons of MASH (a favorite of mine) on DVD or spending that same $160 on my wife & kids, I don't have to tell you what I would choose.


So we can look forward to meeting a new generation of MASH fans?


----------



## Mets82 (Nov 27, 2007)

I agree. Its one thing to have shows on multiple channels. Its another to have, what seems like marathons of the shows on all the time. A poster mentioned above about Mash on FX. What about Mash on Hallmark Channel? Golden Girls on Hallmark Channel? What about Cheers on Hallmark Channel? What about all the shows USA Network show? It seems like everyday they show a marathon of Psych or CSI or NCIS.


----------



## mike1977 (Aug 26, 2005)

Mets82 said:


> I agree. Its one thing to have shows on multiple channels. Its another to have, what seems like marathons of the shows on all the time. A poster mentioned above about Mash on FX. What about Mash on Hallmark Channel? Golden Girls on Hallmark Channel? What about Cheers on Hallmark Channel? What about all the shows USA Network show? It seems like everyday they show a marathon of Psych or CSI or NCIS.


Yeah, every freaking time I turn to USA, 99% of the time it's a marathon of NCIS or Law & Order: SVU. It's ridiculous and sad that they can't have variety anymore and have a different show every hour...NO show being back to back but 30 minute ones with a limit of 2 of them, and it would have to be at least 12 hours before the same show airs again. It's also sad that when it goes into syndication that footage will most likely be missing.

I don't know how many channels I've seen That 70's Show and Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader being shown on. Too many having the same rights to air it within the same time period.


----------



## Rob (Apr 23, 2002)

I notice we don't have a lack of God Channels. How many channels does God really need?


----------



## aardvark17 (Aug 20, 2008)

Rob said:


> I notice we don't have a lack of God Channels. How many channels does God really need?


Just wondering, does god provide redundant shows. never thought to look. does he put up three programs and repeat them in a continuous loop during the broadcast day? man that would really suck. imagine even god ripping off tv viewers.

the sad part is we pay all these services to throw up repeats in a continuous loop. pick whoever your provider is and complain. they say it's the channel programers and they have no control. then if you dare try and go after the channels - look at the immesity of that tasks.

so you can keep throwing money at them and take it like a moron or start crying to the legislators or break the tv habit all together. if you have fast internet most everyting can be found for free.

breaking the addiction if you are under contract means paying off a penalty (usually near the same price as a full year), or reducing the programing to the minimum and they keep trying to sneak in extra fees to get more $$ and make you fight for the quoted prices over a few more months.

the funny part of the bare minimum - you get say 150 channels and by the time you get rid of channels, music and movies you don't watch you are down to 23. guess what the twenty three channels still keep you in a mostly three program continuous loop of shows. only thing not repeating is the locals. Break your TV addiction until they change - Pass The Word Along


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

To be fair, most of the "God" channels pay for carriage on DISH and DirecTV. The shopping and infomercial channels also pay their own way through direct payments and commissions.

The over syndicated programs are odd ... but many of them are on channels with limited availability. And if a show is popular on one channel the other channels are going to want the popular shows on their channels as well. As long as the money comes in the syndicators are going to sell.

I wish they would spread it out more ... a good series on two (or more) channels at the same time and then not on any channel at all after the series finale airs doesn't do as much good as if they took turns.


----------

