- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
I’ll note that Colbert has the highest viewership (and therefore ad revenue) in his time slot. This is almost surely about the Ellison family, which now controls CBS, wanting to silence him.
Lol, owning that much real estate would have made huge gains over the time period. Not a loss at all. You’re clutching at straws.
It’s not conspicuous that the biggest show would fall. It’s lies about the reasons for the axe. The show is critical of trump and they want a merger approved. It’s fascism.
I have no doubt that the large late night show is destined to end and be in the annals of history. Same for cable tv. Same for news on tv. However, being terminal in viewership does not suffenly make it unprofitable before a merger, particyof it’s the biggest show, worth the most viewers and minimal costs.
Real estate gains don’t really matter much so long as the real estate is tied up in actually doing something. Yes they can recoup years of costs if they sold it, but in the meantime owning means a number of expenses.
I am also inclined to think that Trump may be a factor, but then I also saw his point that Colbert had a 3 year contract that is up next year, and that means the network is now having to make the call whether they want to be doing this in 2029, and if they aren’t sure that’s the right way to address the market moving forward for three years, that might explain reluctance. If they might want to invest in a clip-centric format perhaps with a younger host, then this would be the point to make that call.
Lol, all the assets related to a production are considered. You think Disney would have bought star wars just for the films?.the cost of upkeep is an issue when you bring it up, but the gains aren’t? Talk about moving goalposts!
They are ending the show. Of they were unsure, they could have renewed year by year. They have not announced a replacement format, so you’re making stuff up now.
The facts we know if is that Colbert has been critical of the administration and the merger. It’s the most popular show. it’s cheap to make and would be profitable.
It’s kowtowing to Trump for the sake of a financial arrangement. I hope it fails.
Not if Colbert and probably a number of other people would have demanded a multi-year commitment if they were going to continue. For all we know Colbert was ready to hand things over to another host since he is in his 60s now, but the network didn’t want to bother. The replacement strategy was a hypothetical, they might instead invest in yet another drama or maybe a sitcom or something and not even try to fill the role that variety style shows historically filled and cede that to other media and independent streamers.
If they were so financially motivated that of course they should have wanted to keep the show running, they probably would have announced transitioning to a new host, perhaps behind the scenes insisting that they lay off the Trump coverage. Trump would have loved the narrative of personally getting Colbert out of the late night show that he himself used to be a part of a fair amount back in the 80s being interviewed by Letterman. Telling Trump they are “getting the woke out of the show” would probably make him even happier than just canning the entire show.
Trump might have been a factor in closing it out sooner, though if Colbert was of a mind to hand things over to a new host instead of going for another few years then that certainly would have been a plausible decision point too. It’s just hard to really know and it’s worth the caveat that any theory, Trump or otherwise, is speculative and might have a different level of accuracy than we can guess right now until the key people say more than has been said.
You’ve replaced one hypothetical that doesn’t match up, with another. Colbert seemed surprised by the plan, so unlikely they negotiated for either option.
It’s a political, not business decision, which is a big risk for everyone and they should be punished for it by anyone who cares.