Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

I know I am. I've actually halted the purchasing of newer releases and have only resorted to purchasing older shows whose run have been completed. The only shows that I've been buying have been those that I had been buying over the long term and with the exception of Matlock, 24, Barney Miller, Bewitched and Simon and Simon, there aren't any others that I've been buying.

I've been concentrating on buying older shows that have already completed their run. With the Partridge Family, Seasons 1-4, on sale at Amazon.com for $15 each, I have ordered the first two seasons and plan on ordering the third and fourth seasons by the end of the week.

I'm just disgusted by the attitude from the studios and their reluctance to follow through on their commitment to release the rest of the seasons from shows that they release. All in the Family, the Jeffersons, Flipper, Baa Baa Black Sheep, NYPD Blue, Hardy Boys, Invisible Man, The Sentinel are just a few that haven't been completed.

At least with those older shows, I'm guaranteed to get the entire series on DVD and I don't have to wait.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Hi. I too am disgusted with studios. I have been waiting forever for the release of Vince Edwards' tv series Ben Casey and Matt Lincoln, along with the pilot film Dial Hot Line. I can't even get this studios to release any episodes of these series. Matt Lincoln is only sixteen episodes, plus the pilot film Dial Hot Line. It would only mean one release for this series. Yet, these studios release tv series like Tate and Brennan, unknown series with unknown actors. Why do they spend money on series they know will not sell? Vince Edwards' name on a series is a sure sell. How do I convince these geniuses at the studios of this? I am so sick and tired of them trying to justify decisions that cannot be justified.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

I can certainly understand why you'd choose to buy things that you know you can complete, but I cannot for the life of me understand how you can reasonably be disgusted.

Studios release products they can sell. Simple as that. Some shows sell well. Some do not. I simply cannot grasp the word "commitment" in your argument. What commitment? You seem to suggest that by releasing a single season of a series, the studio has made a promise to release all seasons. So if, say, the studio issues "Murphy Brown" and finds that the public at large is uninterested in it (which happened), they are nonetheless obligated to produce the nine subsequent seasons, which will sell even worse.

I just don't get that. There is no promise. They would love to make a profit off every single property they own. But the fact is, not everything sells. And shelf space is finite.

Furthermore, we wouldn't really want that promise. If Paramount were on the hook to release all eleven seasons of "Cheers" once they issued the first, they would never have tested the waters with the first!

Am I disappointed when a show I like is discontinued? Of course! But my disappointment is more with a public that doesn't share my love for that series. Because if they bought it, you can be sure that the studio would produce it.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Excuse me ? Commitment ? When has any studio ever given any sort of solemn vow to customers that they were going to release an entire series regardless of how much it cost them to produce those sets or how much they sold ? Some people really need to get a grip. You are not entitled to an entire series just because that's what you want.

How about those of us who are fed up with the attitude of people who think that their favorite show(s) must be released NOW and as a complete series. This, of course, is supposed to happen regardless of what goes on in the real world or whether or not these releases have actually SOLD enough copies. Has anyone ever heard of something called BUSINESS ?

I'm also fed up with people who refuse to buy a perfectly good release of a show they claim to love simply because the entire series isn't already available. Does it occur to any of these people that if you want more seasons of a show then you need to BUY the previous ones so that future releases can happen ? Huh ? You actually expect a studio to keep putting out a series that doesn't sell ? Are people really that deluded ?

If you choose not to buy a series on DVD, for whatever reason, then you do not have a right to cry and whine when the rest of the show doesn't come out due to low sales. You are part of the problem.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Posting the same comments over and over in many threads here on HTF as well as on every TV related website on the internet isn't going to get your show released. Everyone has shows that they like that don't have a mass appeal but no company is going to release something just because they see one person repeatedly clamoring for it. Especially Universal. What do you think is more in demand, the last 4 seasons of Leave it to Beaver, the remainder of Alfred Hitchcock Presents or Matt Lincoln? Universal doesn't bother with many of their popular, successful shows. Of the hundreds of Universal shows, I can't think of many that would be less likely for them to release.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

I'm kinda fed up with the 'it's a business' lines... :-/ I think most here know it is that, but that doesn't kill fan frustations. Yes, there will always be shows doing better than others, but in the case of Murphy Brown (which I never liked, btw, but many did apparently), surely there's a reason it was on TV for many seasons - then why didn't it do better on DVD? That I find odd. If the fans are there, why aren't they buying and supporting it? And this is all before the current economic crisis, mind you, so where are they (the fans that should be purchasing). They are mainly to blame, not the studios, although the studios still make many stupid decisions that's for sure. I've always been in favor of complete and limited season sets, provided the shows have manageable number of seasons, if studios decided on this approach fans would have to buy. No more excuses, no more fans trembling for further seasons. For instance, there's a complete set of Starsky and Hutch in England - I know it followed single season sets - but why not always do it like that. That way all of Charlie's Angels would've been out in one go, instead of only continuing now after years of delay.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

I think this is a good point - just because a show does well on the air isn't a guarantee that it will sell on DVD. There are several shows I watched and enjoyed in prime time, but that doesn't automatically mean that I'll buy them on DVD. Replay value, cost...a lot of factors go in to whether or not I'll purchase something. I don't think that means I'm not a fan.

As to the main topic - it continues to amaze me that so many people demand that companies continue issuing a series that isn't selling well. If they don't, at least you have one or two seasons of a show. I understand the disappointment, but it wasn't all that long ago when even getting a complete season was unlikely! Just because Paramount only released the first three seasons of Have Gun - Will Travel doesn't detract from my enjoyment of those seasons when I watch them. And the people who argue "I won't buy anything until it's completed" are shooting themselves in the foot - contributing to poor sales, so future releases are unlikely.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Mark, it's defeatist attitudes like yours that prevent the studios from releasing more titles. Instead of bitching and moaning, be active: contact the studios, independent labels like MPI and Shout! Factory that get stuff leased by the majors. Join a fan group for a certain show that has yet to be either released or completed on DVD. You're contributing to a self-fulfiiling prophecy in which the studios won't care anymore because you don't either.

Take it from me: a positive attitude works, even better when there's more of you. In my own experience, I spent the last couple of years sending e-mails to Fox begging them to release Peyton Place, and I also contacted some of the indies, including Shout! Factory, which is now putting the show out on disc. Obviously this studio listened to my plea as well as other fans of the show. So, next week, PP hits the store shelves.

So stop complaining and DO SOMETHING!!!!!!

PS- Thank you David Rain, for saying more or less the same thing.....

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

I see both side of this. As we've talked about on this Bd before, some here are able to justify pre-ordering or buying TV/DVD sets at their releases. I rarely do that since I can't justify the prices when I know that they'll be reduced at a sale months after release. I just try to enjoy what's in my collection in the meantime.

I've often wondered the same question that Henry asked: Where are the fans of the older shows that were successful in their broadcasts when it comes to TV/DVD sales #'s?

We all know the bottom line is the sales #'s. Since we don't have access to that information, we can only guess what those #'s are with these releases.

It's a little OT here but I do understand some of the attitudes toward studios when they release complete sets with TV-movies or extras in the complete sets that were omitted in the single-season releases. There's also the other issues, like music edits, cut episodes, less than average transfer Q, etc.

Just imo, but I still think that TV/DVD sets should be held to similar standards as most of the movie DVD releases when it comes to transfer Q on DVD. Excepting for PD releases, it's difficult for me to accept poor video Q's in TV/DVD releases. Since everyone's standard of that criteria varies, it's hard to quantify.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Not releasing an entire series is equivalent to an Orchestra not doing an entire Symphony. What if wou went to a show, and they announced they were going to do Beethoven's Fifth Symphony, but the only part you heard was "Dah Dah"!

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Charles, so you resort to throwing personal insults? That's something ...

The way I see it, when a studio releases the first season or two and then neglects the rest of the series, they should either release the rest of the series to DVD or issue refunds to everyone who bought those sets already released.

I just think there there are more consumers, online and offline, who are upset over the way studios treate consumers by selling them only a partial product.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

No.

Not even remotely equivalent.

When an orchestra announces its schedule, and it promises "Beethoven's Fifth Symphony," well then yes, you have a reasonable expectation that they will play it in its entirety. And since concerts are not pay-as-you-go affairs -- that is, you don't continue to pay for each movement performed -- there is no way an orchestra could suggest they can't afford to play to the end.

It's just not the same in any way.

What would be the same, or more similar at least, is this question: If an orchestra performs Beethoven's First Symphony, are they obligated to perform the other eight?

And of course, they are not.

(Oh, by the way, concert programs are always "subject to change" and are frequently canceled outright when not enough tickets are bought. Sort of like television series that are discontinued when not enough units are sold.)

A season of a television series is sold as is. There's no mystery to it. Buy this season if you want to watch it. That's it. Am I frustrated that, apparently, I won't get to own future seasons of "All in the Family"? Sure I am. But by the way, do I regret buying what I did? No, because I enjoyed the hell out of them. And the lack of completion doesn't change that one bit.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

I have read Charles' post and don't see anything in there which I could interpret as insulting. To the contrary, I think he gave you some good, constructive advice.

I am a huge SCTV fan, especially the first three seasons when it was in its original incarnation as a half-hour show. After releasing four sets of the later 90-minute shows (each of which sold progressively less than the previous volume), Shout Factory released a scaled-down set of 15 episodes from the original half-hour series -- three from Season 2 and the rest from Season 3. Was I disappointed? Sure. But I have wanted to get these shows in their original form for decades -- as far as I know, only re-edited versions have been available since the mid-1980s -- that is, when the series has been shown at all. So I can't imagine saying, "no, I'm not buying it until they release all three seasons." If that's all that's out there -- I'm grabbing it, and I did. I was lucky to get that.

So now I at least have SOME of the shows in restored form, or in some cases at least pretty close to it. Of course, I could have dug my heels in and refused to buy it -- and had NONE of them. Are you saying that's better? (Apparently a lot of the show's fans did follow your model, and didn't buy it. And notice how there were no more releases after that?)

Sheesh.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

I understand that...but when you buy a ticket for a concert, you're paying for the whole show. When you buy a season of a series, you're getting what you paid for. If you paid to hear the whole symphony and they cut it off, I'd be mad too!

But like others here, I don't accept the notion that the studios owe it to fans to continue to release a series that isn't selling. Yeah, it stinks that some shows are probably never going to be completed. I still stand by the idea that 24 (or 48 or whatever) episodes of a show on DVD are better than zero. I also agree with being proactive - appeal to some of the independent labels if a release gets abandoned by a studio. But if you just say "I won't buy any of "Show X" until the whole series is out," you share part of the blame if subsequent seasons aren't released.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Quite frankly, I'm fed up with threads like this one. There must be a few hundred threads like this now. Why start a new one?

We all know the score about tv dvd's. Poor sales=no releases. There is really nothing new to discuss that hasn't been said already.
Advice I can give you: Enjoy what you have.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Jamoon sort of answered this, but I'll endorse his answer. I have enjoyed "Law & Order" on television for over a decade, but I have no interest in buying the DVDs. I watch the episodes, and then I'm done with them. Whereas a show like "The Bob Newhart Show" I can enjoy over and over. (But not enough people seem to share my sentiment about that one, as it's stalled, potentially for good.)

Some hit series in their initial runs didn't even syndicate well. "Just Shoot Me," for instance, was a pretty big hit on NBC, but reruns fared poorly even on free television.

And the converse can be true -- a show like "Firefly" was not a hit on broadcast, but apparently a disproportionate percentage of the people who did watch it were the sorts who buy DVDs. And "Family Guy" was resurrected by big DVD sales and syndication ratings after it had failed to get much interest in its initial run.

There are some general truisms -- sci-fi and animation seems to sell well to the sorts of people who buy DVDs. But not always.

A show like "Murphy Brown," which I cited earlier (and not for any particular reason), was a zeitgeist-y hit when it first aired, but seems to have dated quickly. The references are old, the initial shock over her single parenthood is boring now, it just hasn't worn well. (And I say this with all due respect to its fans, who would like more.)

And some shows were hits as part of a solid network line-up, but nobody feels especially fond enough to make the effort to buy them on their own.

People on forums like this always like to assume that whatever show they most want is also a universal favorite, so either a studio is lying when they claim it sold poorly (and why would they?), or it simply wasn't properly promoted. This is wish fulfillment. Much as I would love it if everybody enjoyed "The Bob Newhart Show" as much as I do, I realize that that's simply not the case. A shame, for me, but that's that. I still enjoy what I do have.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

It would be nice, but that could just kill studios. Prepping, mastering, authoring, replicating, manufacturing, etc for 5 or 6 (or more) seasons at a time would be very expensive. And you are going to have to have a high SRP, so you are going to eliminate casual fans and impulse buys. Then if it tanks, you have a huge amount of unsold inventory.

Unfortunately there is no easy answer. Money is always going to be the bottom line and I know from experience that it doesn't take much for a release to actually lose money - so it isn't a case of just making less money on a property.

And I don't think studios should be committed to continuing a series anymore than a consumer should be committed to buying subsequent seasons.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Here's an analogy -- take it for what it's worth.

Back in the '70s, my local UHF stations didn't necessarily show the complete run of a series. Channel 39 here in Dallas refused to air a handful of episodes of both "Star Trek" and "The Brady Bunch" in syndication because of what they viewed as objectionable content. Another station here almost never aired the Dick Sargent years of "Bewitched." Still another local station thought black-and-white shows were obsolete and wouldn't air the B&W episodes of "The Adventures of Superman" or "Lost in Space."

Were we local viewers upset? You bet. We felt a sense of entitlement to see ALL the episodes of our favorite series -- after all, they'd been filmed and were readily available. The stations' attitude was "We'll air what we choose to air -- you can choose to watch it, or not."

Is the TV-on-DVD scenario kind of the same thing? I too get frustrated when my favorite shows aren't seen through to completion. But I try to remain grateful for what we DO see released.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Maybe it's time for iTunes to sell these shows.
DVD is going to be dead really soon anyway, just like the CD.
Downloading would eliminate the need for shelf space at retail,
eliminate inventory, eliminate the cost of making the discs...
the customer could burn their own discs (single sided!)


-g

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Amen to that. With all due respect to the person, we get the picture, you're the #1 Vince Edwards fan, but there really should be more than just the same post over and over again in as many threads possible.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

boy am i glad i found this site, i have been purchaceing home video for over 25 years and must say i to have lost all patience with the owners of some of my favorite shows,im not getting any younger what do they wish me to do wait till im to old to enjoy there shows, for the first time i am seriously looking to buy boot leg dvds of some of my favorites so i can enjoy them again while i still can see and hear,i dont want to but feel that time has run out in waiting for some studio executive to give his/her o:k to release these programs

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Well said! Again, the concert analogy falls flat on its face.

It seems that some people have a hard time distinguishing between what they would like and what they angrily expect. Disappointment is very valid. Outrage over a simple truth (companies must make profits to survive) is not.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Welcome to HTF, but you need to read the Forum Rules, especially Rule 5:

There will no more references allowed to bootleg material in this thread. This is the first, last and only warning. Thank you for your cooperation.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Well, I went to a concert a few years ago to hear Symphony No. 8 in B minor (Schubert), and ended up walking out in a huff when they proceeded only to play the first two movements of that work....



PianoPlayer,

I am very curious to learn what segments (or episodes) of The Brady Bunch could be viewed by Channel 39 as containing objectionable content. Do you happen to know what it was? Thanks.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

As am I. Everyone who uses it does so by setting up a straw man argument: that we don't acknowledge that the company must make money. No one has said we want them to lose money. But the studios saw a potential money making opportunity and did it all wrong.

And we don't know what a studio considers to be poor sales. They never publicly state the cost of producing a release which differs from show to show (and trying to get an honest budget figure out of Hollywood is impossible). There could be any number of factors. I have no reason to give them the benefit of the doubt or assume good faith or rational behavior on their part. Their past behavior does not warrant my trust.

If they won't commit to a series in its entirety then, quite frankly, they shouldn't start. Period. They seem to set these shows up for failure by cutting corners everywhere and doing little to no promotion and nothing to instill consumer confidence. They threw hundreds of shows to the wall and almost none of them stuck. Why are recent one-season bombs (as opposed to short-lived shows with cult followings) thrown onto DVD? If no one would watch them for free, who would pay money to watch them?

Add to that the crummy economy and the demise of several B&M stores (which were a huge factor in impulse buys), and you've got a recipe for disaster.

Perhaps the studios could start by limiting the inital pressing runs. Press a small number of copies and see if they sell. That way there are fewer returns if they don't. If there's a demand for more, press more.

And they need to advertise. The last season of Cheers had TV ads on WGN America (and probably other places). The "if-you-build-it-they-will-come" idea is bunk.


This is the smartest statement in this thread. People who refuse to buy season 1 because they believe future seasons will never be released are contributing to the self-fulfilling prophecy.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

I've said it before,and I'll say it again.The studios should make the sales figures of their shows public,just like they do for movies.We would be able to see,for ourselves,if certain shows sold poorly.That would render a lot of these arguments moot.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Matthew, your argument seems articulate and reasoned, but I don't get it.

Why should they release these figures? So we can decide for them if they've made enough money to continue a series? Since when have consumers ever had that right? Who are we to decide these things?

Are you suggesting they then release a complete budgetary breakdown and the incredibly complicated calculations of what payments they have to make to profit participants on a given series? And if you were one of these profit participants, would you really think an explicit breakdown of how much money you made off your work was anybody's business on an internet message board?

Frankly, that's nuts.

And sure, advertise new releases if you can. Do you really think the studios haven't thought of this? But that costs money, money that is not necessarily recouped by significantly greater sales.

It is very easy to sit in contempt of these companies. I do it hourly. But please acknowledge that there are no easy answers, and some things will not sell, not matter how well done they are, and no matter how much money is spent to promote them.

Believe me, I have every reason to hate the studios. As a television writer/producer, I actually believe that a studio owes me a very significant chunk of money on a project I did that they are claiming is millions of dollars in the hole. Yes, creative accounting rules the day.

But I do not, and will never, understand the argument that the studios are purposely leaving money on the table through random odd behavior or some strange anti-show agenda.

We can talk around and around on this, and I'm sure I will take the bait and type some more about it. But it's really a very, very simple equation:

If you want it, buy it. If you don't, don't. Do not assume the existence of any season of a series is an implicit contract to release all seasons. And try to enjoy it.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

I suppose that's true, but i've almost given up.

There are lots and lots of great shows to choose from, and these days
my time is valuable, and i'm not going to commit to starting a series that won't
likely see through to the end. I'll take the risk of being a contributor to the
failure. Why should I risk buying every season one set, only to be disappointed?

The deal us viewers assumed to be the case years ago - that the series would
continue to be released - is broken. Yes, it hurts the chances of a series being
continued if lots and lots of people hold off from buying... but i'm fed up being
the one paying. If that's the case, so be it.

-g

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

Mike*SC, I agree with everything you said.

In addition, we are all accountable to the success or failure of a release. While we don't and never will know how much a studio has to make to consider future season releases plausible, it requires us to buy to even stand a chance. Personally, I wait for sales so I am risking the possibility that revenue may not be quite enough. We all make choices daily on what is an acceptable price of something and we all live with the consequences of those choices. To not buy out of spite really helps no one.

Something I see written a lot and don't quite understand is the need to have all seasons released or none at all. The majority of shows do not contain a story arc that must be completed and is critical to the enjoyment of the show. Some like the Fugitive, BSG, and Invaders I can see that rationale. But for most of the others they just ended when they got cancelled with no big conclusion that is required for enjoyment.

Some of the shows I have: I Love Lucy, Perry Mason, Untouchables, Rawhide, Gunsmoke, Big Valley, HGWT, Time Tunnel, VTBS, and on and on don't require all seasons to enjoy. Do I wish Big Valley had more then 1.5 seasons released? Of course. Would I not buy it because of it. Absolutely not. I'd rather some then none any day.

Re: Who is fed up with the studios attitude on releasing TV Shows?

You hate the industry? That's a shock to me, as every post I've ever read by you is a defense of it.

Technically they are not required by law to show itemized budget figures on an individual DVD release, and I'm sure they'd make excruciatingly tedious reading. But demanding transparency from a publicly held company is not, and never will be, "nuts".

And don't assume for a second that personal attitudes towards shows or films play no part in their DVD treatment, or Song of the South would be available by now. Remember that a Sony executive once said something contemptuous in a public statement to the effect of, "Who wants more than one season of Sanford & Son?" Yet they released all six seasons in a timely fashion. Imagine what they think of some of their other shows.


I don't believe a deal was ever made or implied. Certainly nothing that would hold up in a court of law. Perhaps it should have been, but that could always backfire. Fox said The Mary Tyler Moore Show season 2 would come out six months after the first one and we all know what happened there. Nevertheless, except for rare instances where only the first season is any good, I don't know what mindset believes that fans of a show would only want one season and none others. In fact, first seasons are usually inferior to subsequent ones, yet they sell better in every instance. It's a sad irony. And if it's the public's fault for not liking The Mary Tyler Moore Show (where many fans simply don't like the first season), and if the show at what some consider its weakest is all that's available on DVD (and it was until 2005), would it have made a difference if more than one season had been released, or all of them? Would you buy more seasons if you had only seen season one and disliked it? People have had fond memories of a show, hadn't seen it in years, bought its first season, and been disappointed. Perhaps their tastes have changed radically. Or perhaps their memories were formed based on later seasons.

It is possible these shows lost money, but assuming that it's uniformly because no one wants them on DVD is narrow-minded. If Hollywood ran the country the way they run the studios, a trillion dollar deficit would look like fiscal responsibility. And they'd probably claim they were losing money when there was a surplus; I'm sure Forrest Gump would have something to say about that. The studios could have overpaid for things on which they could have spent less money. The point is that we don't know, and vague statements from studio representatives do not illuminate the situation any better than these threads and the snap judgements on all sides have.

I never pre-order. I buy a show based on reviews stating whether or not it's been screwed up. If it's "safe" (meaning if it contains acceptable picture and sound quality and uncut episodes), I buy it. I do my part to ensure the potential for seeing a show released in its entirety.