# What Is With T.V. Land And The Commercials?



## PrinceLH

Can't believe the commercials, on TV Land. It's totally ridiculous, that a television program, like Gunsmoke, or Bonanza has been stretched into half an infomercial Those programs were originally edited for one hour, including commercials. Now, they turn them into an hour and 15 minutes, an hour and 18 minutes. On top of that, they edit the credits and insert them near the end of the program, while the show is still playing. Is Viacom that greedy for revenue, that they make their daytime shows unwatchable? I get fed up and turn it over to my Over-the-air system and grab AntennaTV or MeTV, so I can actually watch a show in 60 minutes. TV Land is just brutal!:nono2:


----------



## Charise

Yep, they are all that greedy, sad to say.


----------



## txtommy

Watch Gunsmoke and Bonanza on the Western Channel commercial free.


----------



## PrinceLH

I do that. However, the Westerns Channel only have the early episodes of Gunsmoke(the best episodes) and they are in Black and White. Bonanza, over there, is the so called lost episodes, and are kind of a snapshot of 3 years of the series and not the best episodes. Gunsmoke aired for 20 years, so the first half where black and white, but the second 10 years where in color. I will say, however, that Encore Westerns did a good job restoring these series and deserves credit. TVLand is just a shell of it's past glory.


----------



## mitchflorida

I, for one, was disappointed that the Viacom dispute ended so quickly. It is really a very sleazy operation, if you notice what sort of programming they put on their other channels, including, MTV, Spike, etc. And of course the ads. I hate how they roll the credits at 60 mph at the end of the show. Of course, I use a DVR so I really skip the ads, and so should you.


----------



## jdspencer

Commercials are why the DVR was invented!


----------



## Renard

Gee, I hate that when the channels are cutting our favorite commercials with stupid shows, movies, or sport events. (sarcasm)


----------



## Church AV Guy

PrinceLH said:


> Can't believe the commercials, on TV Land. It's totally ridiculous, that a television program, like Gunsmoke, or Bonanza has been stretched into half an infomercial Those programs were originally edited for one hour, including commercials. Now, they turn them into an hour and 15 minutes, an hour and 18 minutes. On top of that, they edit the credits and insert them near the end of the program, while the show is still playing. Is Viacom that greedy for revenue, that they make their daytime shows unwatchable? I get fed up and turn it over to my Over-the-air system and grab AntennaTV or MeTV, so I can actually watch a show in 60 minutes. TV Land is just brutal!:nono2:


They frequently air half hour shows, like The Dick Van **** show in a 35 or even 40 minute block. That's just about 50% commercial time, and as you said, the closing credits air in a small inset window in a corner of the screen that shows OVER the end of the episode. So the answer must be YES, they are THAT greedy for revenue!:nono2: I too have quit watching TV Land and am watching METV and AntennaTV.


----------



## PrinceLH

Church AV Guy said:


> They frequently air half hour shows, like The Dick Van **** show in a 35 or even 40 minute block. That's just about 50% commercial time, and as you said, the closing credits air in a small inset window in a corner of the screen that shows OVER the end of the episode. So the answer must be YES, they are THAT greedy for revenue!:nono2: I too have quit watching TV Land and am watching METV and AntennaTV.


Unfortunately, MeTV and AntennaTV are out of market, in my area. I do have a great antenna array and I can usually pitch it towards lake Ontario and snag the Rochester, NY market. Antenna only comes in, if I snag Buffalo and that's only about 40% of the time. Too bad that Directv wouldn't add these two networks to their SD lineup. It's what Nick At Night and TVLand used to be, before Viacom ruined them.


----------



## djzack67

"txtommy" said:


> Watch Gunsmoke and Bonanza on the Western Channel commercial free.


+1


----------



## ejjames

I just bought the entire 5 seasons of The Twilight Zone on blu ray. They went back to the 35mm camera negative, and the resolution and restoration done is just incredible.

Most episodes run 25:30 to 26:00. I'm seeing entire scenes, cut for syndication, that I've never seen before.

If you're a fan, the picture you get from the sci fi...sorry...SCY FY channel marathons don't do it justice. Try blu ray.


----------



## trainman

ejjames said:


> I just bought the entire 5 seasons of The Twilight Zone on blu ray. They went back to the 35mm camera negative, and the resolution and restoration done is just incredible.
> 
> Most episodes run 25:30 to 26:00. I'm seeing entire scenes, cut for syndication, that I've never seen before.
> 
> If you're a fan, the picture you get from the sci fi...sorry...SCY FY channel marathons don't do it justice. Try blu ray.


These same restored episodes are also available for streaming on Netflix (except Season 4, for whatever reason), in case anyone wants to check them out before spending money for the Blu-ray.


----------



## fleckrj

At least TV Land extends the time of the program to add more commercials. BBCA cuts segments from the program to add more commercials into the same amount of time. They are both greedy, but I like TV Land's method better than BBCA's


----------



## ejjames

trainman said:


> These same restored episodes are also available for streaming on Netflix (except Season 4, for whatever reason), in case anyone wants to check them out before spending money for the Blu-ray.


I am aware of the HD episodes on Netflix, and although it looks good, it can't match BR. I'm also into commentary tracks, and some episodes have 3 or 4. Netflix, however, is a good way to go for many viewers.


----------



## Laxguy

djzack67 said:


> +1


Mr. Zack: Time to change your sig!!



> __________
> Waiting for
> BBCA HD


Enjoy!


----------



## zimm7778

I posted this awhile back on another thread when this topic came up. I'd love for one of the premium distributors to take one of their channels and start airing classic tv shows the way they were originally aired. Not the syndication cuts, not the ridiculous further cuts made for them to be aired as they are now. The original versions. I think a lot of people would pay for that.


----------



## FLWingNut

Including one that we'll never see in its original format -- WKRP in Cincinnati. Due to music rights issues, we will likely never see them they way they were originally broadcast. Even the one season they put on DVD is dubbed over with different music. What a shame.


----------



## wipeout

The History Channel has been ruined as well. I always used to be able to find interesting content on there and now all you get is crap reality programs. It is just soooo frustrating to pay all this monbey every month and get stuck with TV you have no interest in watching.


----------



## maartena

djzack67 said:


> +1


Your signature is wrong. You are no longer waiting for BBC America HD.


----------



## Laxguy

OK; see post 15....


----------



## Carl Spock

fleckrj said:


> At least TV Land extends the time of the program to add more commercials. BBCA cuts segments from the program to add more commercials into the same amount of time. They are both greedy, but I like TV Land's method better than BBCA's


Absolutely. If it takes something like this to see The Dick Van **** Show or M*A*S*H uncut, I'll vote for making a classic half hour TV episode take 37 minutes any day.

Beyond that, really how hard is it to hit "Record" and start watching 15 minutes later? As pointed out upthread, this is why DVRs exist.


----------



## mreposter

wipeout said:


> The History Channel has been ruined as well. I always used to be able to find interesting content on there and now all you get is crap reality programs. It is just soooo frustrating to pay all this monbey every month and get stuck with TV you have no interest in watching.


Sadly, other subscribers disagree with you. Once History started running those "crap reality programs" their ratings shot through the roof.

Some of us might like interesting, educational and sometimes challenging programming, but there are far to few of us to make a difference.


----------



## john262

wipeout said:


> The History Channel has been ruined as well. I always used to be able to find interesting content on there and now all you get is crap reality programs. It is just soooo frustrating to pay all this monbey every month and get stuck with TV you have no interest in watching.


That's why I am unplugging it when my contract runs out.


----------



## john262

Carl Spock said:


> Absolutely. If it takes something like this to see The Dick Van **** Show or M*A*S*H uncut, I'll vote for making a classic half hour TV episode take 37 minutes any day.
> 
> Beyond that, really how hard is it to hit "Record" and start watching 15 minutes later? As pointed out upthread, this is why DVRs exist.


Yes of course we can do that, but that doesn't make what Viacom is doing right. Then we have people like my grandmother who doesn't even know what a DVR is. She is stuck with watching all of those commercials or turning it off.


----------



## Carl Spock

So what's your solution, *john262*? Have them cut the program to smithereens to fit in the normal 15-16 minutes of commercials an hour?

Another alternative would be to insert only the 7-8 minutes of commercials per hour that was common in the 1960s and 1970s. That isn't a realistic choice. If you were TVLand and could either run M*A*S*H with 4 minutes of commercials or, say, Friends, with 8 minutes of commercials, which would you run?


----------



## Scott Kocourek

I'm moving this to the TV Shows Forum where everyone can participate.


----------



## SayWhat?

The Nick channels do it too and a couple of others. Maybe they're all ViaCon channels.


----------



## Laxguy

Scott Kocourek said:


> I'm moving this to the TV Shows Forum where everyone can participate.


*Great *idea! 
The more the merrier!


----------



## john262

Carl Spock said:


> So what's your solution, *john262*? Have them cut the program to smithereens to fit in the normal 15-16 minutes of commercials an hour?
> 
> Another alternative would be to insert only the 7-8 minutes of commercials per hour that was common in the 1960s and 1970s. That isn't a realistic choice. If you were TVLand and could either run M*A*S*H with 4 minutes of commercials or, say, Friends, with 8 minutes of commercials, which would you run?


Why isn't that a realistic choice? The networks used to get by just fine with less commercial time so why can't they now? But now it's all about greed. My solution is for Viacom to be less greedy and accept fewer commercial spots. And if they refuse the viewers should boycott them until they do.

Viacom Reports 33 Percent Gain in Profit:

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/10/viacom-reports-33-percent-gain-in-profits/

A 33 percent gain in profit? They sure aren't hurting. Cut back their commercials spots and make a 25 percent gain in profit. They will still be doing just fine. And while they're at it cut their CEO's multimillion dollar salary.


----------



## PrinceLH

Why don't they just leave the commercial content alone and have the sponsor pay more for the limited slots. Half the time, they're just the same block of commercials, that they just keep replaying. Getting upset with them continually playing the abused animals slot, a few times every hour. Less commercials, get more from the sponsors! My only idea for this dilemma.


----------



## Carl Spock

So john262's solution is for Viacom to make less money selling commercials on TVLand.

And PrinceLH's answer is for Viacom to charge more for fewer commercials.

If the ratings decline far enough on TVLand, and Viacom can tie that to viewer disgust over too many commercials, then john262's solution could work.

If the ratings rise on TVLand and Viacom can determine that is because of viewer satisfaction with seeing less commercials, then PrinceLH has the answer.

Personally, I don't see either possibility happening. I think more commercials is the obvious answer, especially for older shows with fewer avails. There is only so much Viacom can charge for the 9,263rd rerun of an episode of The Andy Griffith Show. And even with that show's continued popularily, there are only so many people who will watch it.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

I've seen all the ads on TV Land as well...although....it seems like many networks are adding commerical/advertising time. They are not alone.

The channel self-promotions are getting annoying at times on multiple channels as well.


----------



## ejjames

I remember when we added TVLand to USSB around '95. We had it all ready to go, but we were only given a "thumbs up" with about 5 minutes notice.

I used to love when they were all about classic tv, and they would air old "retromercials" during commercial breaks.


----------



## mhayes70

I am glad to see that I am not the only one that was thinking this about there stupid commercials.


----------



## john262

Carl Spock said:


> I think more commercials is the obvious answer, especially for older shows with fewer avails.


What are you, a Viacom shareholder? Why are you taking the side of a greedy big corporation that is trying to shove more commercials down our throats?

:grin:


----------



## Carl Spock

You've got me. I make ten cents each time Viacom runs a commercial.


----------



## Paul Secic

ejjames said:


> I remember when we added TVLand to USSB around '95. We had it all ready to go, but we were only given a "thumbs up" with about 5 minutes notice.
> 
> I used to love when they were all about classic tv, and they would air old "retromercials" during commercial breaks.


Back in 1996 we had TCI and TVLand shared a channel with A&E. Then they moved TVLand to digital. Of course they charged more.


----------



## renbutler

The most overused words in 2012:

"greed" and "greedy"

It's become an epidemic. The words have almost lost all meaning.


----------



## PrinceLH

ejjames said:


> I remember when we added TVLand to USSB around '95. We had it all ready to go, but we were only given a "thumbs up" with about 5 minutes notice.
> 
> I used to love when they were all about classic tv, and they would air old "retromercials" during commercial breaks.


Yes, I remember when TVLand first appeared. I remember when it first arrived, I was a C Band user and it was fantastic. So was Nick At Night, back then. Those retro commercials were excellent and I couldn't stop watching the format. Now, I just pick and choose what I watch on those channels. I'd rather watch Antenna TV or MeTV, because that is where most of the good content went. Too bad Directv wouldn't pick these two feeds up, full time.


----------



## john262

renbutler said:


> The most overused words in 2012:
> 
> "greed" and "greedy"
> 
> It's become an epidemic. The words have almost lost all meaning.


Maybe those words are used more nowadays because the big corporations are more greedy nowadays.


----------



## renbutler

*facepalm*


----------



## Laxguy

john262 said:


> Maybe those words are used more nowadays because the big corporations are more greedy nowadays.


No; corporations are not greedier than they were twenty years ago.


----------



## phrelin

Corporations aren't greedy because, the Supreme Court notwithstanding, they aren't people. Officers, board members, and shareholders can be greedy though.


----------



## renbutler

Yep. Corporate types are just like the middle class and the poor in this regard:

Some of them are good, some of them are bad, and the majority of them are somewhere in between.


----------



## Carl Spock

The biggest difference between big Wall Street corporations today versus yesterday is there is more of an emphasis on short term profits versus long term ones.

Both are money motivated. 

Corporations are no less greedy today than 30 years ago, or even 120 years ago. In fact, it's easy to argue they were the greeediest back in the 1890s before there was much of any government regulation. Corporations did as they pleased with their employees, customers and stockholders.


----------



## djlong

Corporations have to serve their masters. I don't mean that in a negative way, it's just the way it is. Those masters are the shareholders.

These days, shareholders are much quicker to scream "fiduciary malfeasance" when the stock price doesn't do well so the corps are all looking at the next quarter's numbers.

Kind of like how Verizon said they were going to string fiber to everyone - a project that would have untold benefits for the next century. After a couple of years, shareholder pressure said they were spending too much on investing in the future and demanded a stop to it (and we get that in politics as well).

Probably a coincidence, but MTV started in 1981 and was blamed for single-handedly reducing the attention span of Americans. Those Americans who watched MTV then are now in their 40s-60s.


----------



## renbutler

Also, don't forget that corporations that are REALLY bad to their customers (whether in an effort to maximize profits, please shareholders, or whatever) typically aren't successful, or at best they don't thrive.

It's hard to make money if you screw your constantly customers, if those customers have better alternatives. That's the beauty of competition. And most industries, including TV providers and programmers, have at least some competition.

And those customers who sit back and allow themselves to be screwed instead of escaping to a better available alternative have nobody to blame but themselves.


----------

