MovieChat Forums > Better Off Ted (2009) Discussion > ABC sucks but it is typical for them

ABC sucks but it is typical for them

posted 15 years ago by r2917
13 replies | jump to latest

We all know this show is amazing and that its most likely eventual cancellation is a freaking ridiculous move. However, it is fitting for ABC since they are the most clueless network of them all. ABC is THE network to go to if you have a clever show and want it to die because the morons who run that network have no clue how to promote a show and appreciate quality. Pushing Daisies is a great example of this. Awesome show but like BoT, it died because ABC screwed around with it. I am confident if Bot was on CBS that there would be no issues of it dying.

So no doubt they will cancel this along with Scrubs (never seen it but heard it is good) and fill the time with yet another generic and moronic reality show since that is what the network is about. They'll promote the hell out of that and give it a fair shot which they clearly didn't with BoT given when it first started at the end of the reg tv season/running during the summer and the jerking around of its schedule.

I'd have had no clue how good this show was if it weren't for a buddy peeping me it and I am thankful he did. I wish I knew thousands of people so I could get them to tune in and hopefully save it since it seems ratings are all that matter now thus why reality shows are still going as strong as ever despite their idiocy as well as shows that need to die like The Office which has gone on a couple years too long.

Hopefully SOMEHOW this show gets a nice following and it'll be like Family Guy where they'll bring it back after seeing the demand. I also hope they release the 2 seasons on blu-ray as I have no desire to keep buying DVD sets of shows I know were filmed in HD. As it is, I can't show my dollar support because of S01 only being on DVD right now.

I am amazed that Lost has lasted on this piece of crap network but I guess it started before the really big reality tv crap phase we have now where almost every show that has some intelligence, creativity and solid writing/acting is hurt.

Just pathetic. The heads of ABC need to be ashamed at how they kill such good shows.

[–] lordxur 15 years ago

Personally, I have no problem with ABC for their treatment of BoT, just like I had no problem with Fox when they pulled the plug on Arrested Development.

The networks are driven by ratings. Always. Advertisers look at the top-rated shows and want to send their ad $$ toward those shows. So when an excellent show like BoT comes around but ends up in the Nielsen dumps, it becomes a fiscal decision. I wish it wasn't, but that's the reality.

I loved Pushing Daisies, but that show benefited from the Writer's Strike. It did well in its first season because it was new and interesting and there was little else out there. Once its second season came out, almost everyone stopped watching it.

And as for Scrubs? Please don't feel bad for Scrubs. It's been around for 9 years and at least two different networks.

I loved Arrested Development and was sad when it ended, but now I look at the three seasons that were made were excellent tv. I'll feel the same way about BoT.

[–] winstonlite 15 years ago

I have a problem with you not having a problem. Yeah, ABC is about making a profit and ratings drive ad revenues which makes money for the network, but can't there be some balance? Are we just going to end up with another detective or medical drama?

I wonder if it's possible for shows like this to make money if they were strictly online. I'd be willing to pay a subscription for this show as well as couple of others. I don't think that's so far-fetched. More and more people are getting their content from the web than traditional television broadcasts.

[–] Osova 15 years ago

I'm MORE than in agreement with what you've said about paying for a subscription. This show is brilliant, and I would definitely pay to watch it, along with some others as well!

ABC just has no interest whatsoever to try ANYTHING with this show. It's sad.

[–] Spongeyone 15 years ago

I wonder if it's possible for shows like this to make money if they were strictly online. I'd be willing to pay a subscription for this show as well as couple of others

It costs $1-1.5 million to make a single half hour episode, or about $30 million for a full season of BOT. BOT gets about 3.5 million viewers per episode, so you'd need to convince almost all of them to pitch in $10 a season. I don't think that's plausible.

[–] ThomasMuf 15 years ago

I agree that, fundamentally, this is a business first and foremost and if a show doesn't attract enough viewers, it's doomed.

However, this show bites the bullet because of the horrible marketing it got by ABC. There was next to no advertising, next to no exploiting the fact that critics LOVED this show. I admit I wouldn't see it going on for mor than 4 seasons anyway because it's bound to run out of ideas due to its restricted setting and scope. However, I would have loved to have those four seasons. ;=)

I have to agree that: ABC sucking bis time - is the main reason that this hilarious sitcom has to go way before its time. This is what you get when people who don't know *beep* about how quality eventually prevails when given a chance are running the business. I mean, look at the IMDB resume of ABC's head honcho. The guy himself was a screenwriter, and a very bad one!

[–] kep315 15 years ago

Do you mean Bob Iger? Because he's the current president of Walt Disney, who owns ABC. As far as I can tell, though, he was never a screenwriter.

[–] ThomasMuf 15 years ago

No, I mean Stephen McPherson, who's head of programming at ABC. He wrote episodes of Air America, Poltergeist: The Series and Buck Rogers.

[–] kep315 15 years ago

What?! No IMDB photo of ol' Stephie? How am I supposed to take his most prominent feature, compare it to genitalia (male, female, or animal), and end with the suffix -bag, -wipe, or -muncher?

[–] guyver_14606 15 years ago

It sucks that a consistently funny show like Better off Ted is getting such poor treatment , I'd be happy with this show for at least 4 seasons but like many many many good shows before it, because those dumb "neislen" households don't watch it the millions and millions of us who may watch it or DVR it will lose a quality show.

Companies need to start gettin real about ratings, the old system sucks, is fairly useless and doesn't account for the internet viewings or even DVR viewings, I know MANY families or adults who don't watch live programs and watch them eventually on their DVR...... does that mean they shouldn't count towards the "ratings" of course not.

Oh well the good thing is you can find quality programming now on the internet and on tv (until the network decides that it costs too much or isn't hitting the "target" audience and your favorite show is pulled.

"We've got movie sign!"

[–] Spongeyone 15 years ago

What?! No IMDB photo of ol' Stephie? How am I supposed to take his most prominent feature, compare it to genitalia (male, female, or animal), and end with the suffix -bag, -wipe, or -muncher?

http://media.herald-dispatch.com/blog/tuned/uploaded_images/mcpherson- 725240.jpg
Have fun

[–] kep315 15 years ago

What?! No IMDB photo of ol' Stephie? How am I supposed to take his most prominent feature, compare it to genitalia (male, female, or animal), and end with the suffix -bag, -wipe, or -muncher?

http://media.herald-dispatch.com/blog/tuned/uploaded_images/mcpherson- 725240.jpg
Have fun

Stephen McPherson, you're a talentless, ass-chinned marsupial who wouldn't recognize a great show if it called out its name while you made love to it. Dungwipe!

It costs $1-1.5 million to make a single half hour episode, or about $30 million for a full season of BOT. BOT gets about 3.5 million viewers per episode, so you'd need to convince almost all of them to pitch in $10 a season. I don't think that's plausible

That's only less than a dollar an episode. Yes, for only less than a dollar an episode, you too can help Better Off Ted survive in a hostile environment...

[–] james_norman1981 15 years ago

Firefly
Dollhouse
Buffy and Angel (ish - they got a proper shot at least!)

And they're just Joss Whedon shows! While the likes of the Simpsons, 24, American Idle and the rest continue going long past their sell by date (NB American Idel, if it is what I think it is, never actually had a sell by date, just a 'sold our soul' date stamped on the day they first started production).

All these corporations care about is money, understandably. As such it's much better for them to make extremely cheap, extremely profitable 'unscripted' television that makes money not only from advertisers but also from phone ins. These programs make me sick, but I'm not really the target audience (thank god). I prefer something a little lighter, but NEVER laugh tracked (with very occasional exceptions - eg Black Adder seasons 2-4).

Unfortunately for the likes of Better Off Ted, comedy shows are always going to find it difficult to be profitable because there's not that much forcing you to watch every episode, thereby pumping up the ratings. The over riding arc of other shows, such as 'How do they get off the island?' in Lost, or 'How will Jack Bauer save his daughter, the President and several million Americans all by himself in the next hour?' are far more gripping and that's why shows like Lost and 24 still get big ratings despite the fact they've long since discarded all novelty and freshness (the new season of 24 feels like a very tired rehash of the previous SEVEN series while Lost has long since gone the way of Twin Peaks for me, but without the latter's revelation!).

Compare this to BOT. Will Ted ever get together with Linda? Will Veronica corrupt Linda into becoming a corporate drone or will Linda help Veronica (re?)discover her humanity? Can Phil and Lem ever achieve a lasting aspect of manhood? All of those questions are funny, and make for hysterical television, but you can watch the show three weeks apart and know that significant changes haven't occurred. And that's why they don't get 10 million Nielsen rating thingies.

Which leads to the true villain in all this. Fox, ABC, NBC (studio 60) and the rest all cut great shows we love and want to see more of. But they're doing so because they can't afford to make a program for half a million people, especially if, like BOT, that program is expensive (the actors, sets etc can't be cheap compared to the likes of Married with Children - one set with four crummy actors!).

Only it may well be that these shows are being seen by a lot more than the ratings systems say they are, only those people are watching them online or, ahem, illegally downloading them. The problem there is that it is much easier to avoid the advertising posted during and around the show - which is the revenue (read lifeblood) of any program.

What we need is an alternative system for ratings and, though God knows how, a way of paying for these shows, while avoiding their constant ad breaks, that allows them to be profitable.

So, in summary, ABC sucks. NBC sucks. Fox sucks like a vacuum. But without those networks there'd be no shows at all. If we want to save the likes of BOT we need to somehow coerce the ratings system to take account of our choice, not blame the network executive!

Wow did I get off topic in this post.

[–] jasonventer 15 years ago

I will watch Better Off Ted as long as new episodes continue to appear and amuse me, regardless of the network on which they view. If ABC isn't willing to be that network, what's stopping the others from stepping up to the plate? Fox produces the show. It could easily air on USA Network (who has a real knack lately for finding and nurturing great shows from Fox and others), NBC (which is the parent company of USA and badly in need of quality programming right now after the failed Leno experiment), CBS (which seems to be doing very well for itself by giving its strong shows a chance to develop into something that sustains an audience) or even Fox itself. The only thing that wouldn't make sense is for Better Off Ted to leave the airwaves.

Honestly, I just barely started watching the show two weeks ago. I didn't even know that it was still on or that it was great, but I found some episodes available online through ABC.com (linked from elsewhere, apparently on a whim) and I couldn't help but love what I saw. I voted for the show to stay on the air by purchasing the first season on DVD (even though I love Blu-Ray now and try to go that route when possible). There are likely many others like me who haven't had a chance to realize that this show exists, that it's truly great. ABC's scheduling has truly been baffling in its level of incompetence. A network that will give this show a chance--and a full season or two--needs to pick it up and I'm convinced that said network could probably get another good five or six seasons out of the concept and writers.

It's infuriating that as viewers we ultimately are so powerless to let networks know--on a functioning level--what we want to watch, what we would pay to keep watching. I'm with others in this thread. If ABC cancels Better Off Ted after doing the same with Life On Mars and Pushing Up Daisies, well... I guess there's no reasonable response but to stop watching the network. Not that doing so would be hard. Better Off Ted is the last thing ABC has going that I even care about.