• The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.

Why Rangers Might Fail - Analysis

C

channe

Regular
I've been meaning to get around to this. There are a couple main reasons why a product fails, and I noticed that ALL of them could really apply to Rangers.

Rangers could...

1. Fail to meet the customers' needs. The customer, in this case, is primarily the network. The network needs good ratings. If it doesn't get good ratings, B5LR will be scrapped. This depends on the movie meeting the fans' needs as well.

2. Poor timing. If Rangers is aired at a bad time, nobody will watch, and the show will be scrapped.

3. Bad market conditions. This includes competition from shows like Enterprise - how receptive is the market to shows like B5LR?

4. Ineffective or inconsistent branding. I don't think B5LR has to worry here - it has a pretty good pedigree.

5. Design or technical problems - here, we're talking about story or effects. A dumb plot will gain bad reviews. Bad reviews will scrap the show.

6. Overestimation of market size. I think this one's self-explanatory.

7. Poor promotion. It could be the best thing in the world, but if nobody knows about it, hey - the show is scrapped.

8. Insufficient distribution. This could be a problem - not everyone gets the Sci-Fi Channel, therefore not everyone who would watch the show can.

--

This is just a fast, on-the-fly analysis, as I'm hungry and have to meet someone for lunch. Cheerio.

------------------
Channe, the pseudo-Ranger, who lives for the One and dies for the chocolate cheesecake
--
OnlineDude: I suppose now would not be the time to bring up the old one about the starlet who was so new to Hollywood she slept with the writer...
JMS: But that was only because she heard that in Hollywood, *everyone* screws the writer.
--
"Foreshadowing! Your key to quality literature!" -Berkeley Breathed
 
*pokes the above thread* Oh, Valen. I need a life.

------------------
Channe, the pseudo-Ranger, who lives for the One and dies for the chocolate cheesecake
--
OnlineDude: I suppose now would not be the time to bring up the old one about the starlet who was so new to Hollywood she slept with the writer...
JMS: But that was only because she heard that in Hollywood, *everyone* screws the writer.
--
"Foreshadowing! Your key to quality literature!" -Berkeley Breathed

[This message has been edited by channe (edited October 17, 2001).]
 
Channe, I think that is a very good analysis. You made some excellent points and these are points that we need to keep in mind while we are waiting to see what Scifi will do with Rangers. Let's hope that none of these things do happen, but if they do we have to realize that Scifi will do what they will. We can try and do our part by watching the movie and getting others to watch it as well, but it's ultimately up to Scifi whether it will fail or not, and most likely one or more of these things that you have listed could come into play.

------------------
RW, the salad ambassador. Visit my salad bar forum at www.b5rangers.net
 
Ladies and gentlemen, for a limited time only, the mighty GKarsEye plays optimist.

1. Fail to meet the customers' needs. The customer, in this case, is primarily the network. The network needs good ratings. If it doesn't get good ratings, B5LR will be scrapped. This depends on the movie meeting the fans' needs as well.

Well, of course this is true with any show. The only thing anyone can honestly and truthfully say is, "Wait and see."

2. Poor timing. If Rangers is aired at a bad time, nobody will watch, and the show will be scrapped.

Sci-fi will not invest in an original show and put it on Sunday morning. If it happens, it will be considered prime programming, like Farscape. Sci-fi Channel, as of now, puts most or all of its original shows on Fridays at prime time. It is safe to assume they would do the same with Rangers. If not Friday, then it will certainly be on prime time on some day.

3. Bad market conditions. This includes competition from shows like Enterprise - how receptive is the market to shows like B5LR?

Why does everyone bring up competition with Enterprise? As long as they are not on at the same time (I'm going to assume the Sci-fi programming execs aren't retarded enough to do that), this isn't an issue. Every genre has many shows in it, why can't sci-fi be the same? Look at all the lawyer, doctor, and "reality" shows there are, or sitcoms about some family. They do fine.

4. Ineffective or inconsistent branding. I don't think B5LR has to worry here - it has a pretty good pedigree.

I don't really know what this mean, so I won't comment

5. Design or technical problems - here, we're talking about story or effects. A dumb plot will gain bad reviews. Bad reviews will scrap the show.

Good plots can also get bad reviews. I recall this happening to a TV show called Babylon something or other...
Besides, bad plot from the B5 crew? Have you no faith? And this coming from an Atheist.
FX didn't hurt B5 (or if it did, the show succeeded anyway). Isn't it more likely that the effects will be better on the new show? FX tend to improve with time.

6. Overestimation of market size. I think this one's self-explanatory.

Sci-fi is well aware that they cater to a niche market. Their target isn't the general public, it is science fiction audiences. I would think they are hoping to achieve the same success they are having with Farscape. Note that very few people actually watch it, but for the Sci-fi channel, it's a great success.
Perhaps the most important reason the Sci-fi channel has been increasing its viewership is exactly that: understanding its audience.

7. Poor promotion. It could be the best thing in the world, but if nobody knows about it, hey - the show is scrapped.

This isn't directed at Channe, but at everybody: I am so f***in' fed up with all the bitching about no promotion. They are totally promoting it. Trailers came out. The Crusade marathon. Their web site. They would not invest in it without marketing. If anything, the biggest mistake of a lot of companies recently has been too much marketing (.com companies, for example). There will be commercials when the movie and/or show approaches. What do expect, planes writing the "Watch B5:Rangers in the sky?" A smaller network does smaller promotion, it's that simple. And oversaturation is not a good thing. I doubt I'm the only one sick of all the Survivor ads.
And let's not forget the most important peice of advertising for Rangers: reruns of B5. Even if they aren't watched, it keeps the B5 universe in the consciousness of the sci-fi audient.

8. Insufficient distribution. This could be a problem - not everyone gets the Sci-Fi Channel, therefore not everyone who would watch the show can.

Again, the show wouldn't be targetting everyone, it would be targetting sci-fi audiences who, yes, actually get the sci-fi channel. No show will ever get canned because people who logistically had no possible way of watching didn't watch. That's expecting the impossible, and ratings don't depend on the impossible, they're just about people watching some TV

People, can we please ease up on the panic over here? Let us be patient. I'm a pretty agressive, ancy, pessimistic dude, so coming from me, this should tell you something.

It just seems that people aren't being realistic with their expectations for promotion and results. I think I might not visit this board after the movie airs, because I'll ending reading dozens of posts that look like, "That movie sucked because it wasn't like B5. No Delenn or Garibaldi or Lyta. The characters were too young and different than B5." And so forth.


------------------
"You do not make history. You can only hope to survive it."

[This message has been edited by GKarsEye (edited October 17, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by GKarsEye (edited October 17, 2001).]
 
GKarsEye, I'm being the devil's advocate with this. If I didn't think Rangers was going to be an absolutely smashing success, I wouldn't be here at B5LR. I'm going to love it, I'm going to love it, and I can tell you that already. BUT, I love, love, love, playing Devil's Advocate, getting my teeth around the situation in any way I can just as much as I love Rangers. So, my continued responses are below:

Originally posted by GKarsEye:


(Fail to meet the customer's needs.) Well, of course this is true with any show. The only thing anyone can honestly and truthfully say is, "Wait and see."

Yes, of course.

2. Poor timing.

Sci-fi will not invest in an original show and put it on Sunday morning. If it happens, it will be considered prime programming, like Farscape. Sci-fi Channel, as of now, puts most or all of its original shows on Fridays at prime time. It is safe to assume they would do the same with Rangers. If not Friday, then it will certainly be on prime time on some day.

This is one thing that's going for Rangers. So far, it looks like Sci-Fi is behind this project (the movie only) 100%, and is going to give it every chance possible to succeed.

3. Bad market conditions. This includes competition from shows like Enterprise - how receptive is the market to shows like B5LR?

Why does everyone bring up competition with Enterprise? As long as they are not on at the same time (I'm going to assume the Sci-fi programming execs aren't retarded enough to do that), this isn't an issue. Every genre has many shows in it, why can't sci-fi be the same? Look at all the lawyer, doctor, and "reality" shows there are, or sitcoms about some family. They do fine.

I'm bringing up Enterprise because the fact remains that it *is* competition. In the toy market, for example, K'Nex is in competition with Lincoln Logs and Lego. Their products are totally different, but one thing remains: they're all construction games, and THEY COMPETE for the attention of kids who like construction tool games. Lego has an entirely different interface than K'Nex. But the fact remains that they still compete for the same market - kids who like construction toy games.

This is how it is in science fiction. We're the kids, B5LR is K'Nex and Enterprise is Lego. They're competing tooth and nail for our attention. Like it or not, B5LR *is* in competition with Enterprise - hell, with every SF show on television.

4. Ineffective or inconsistent branding.

I don't really know what this mean, so I won't comment

Frito-Lay, maker of salty snack foods, once came out with a product called Frito-Lay Lemonade. I'll give you three guesses to figure out why the product bombed.

B5 has a good name to it. It's sort of the case of the actor who makes it in Hollywood because he/she is a Barrymore. Or something like that.

5. Design or technical problems.

Good plots can also get bad reviews. I recall this happening to a TV show called Babylon something or other...
Besides, bad plot from the B5 crew? Have you no faith? And this coming from an Atheist.
FX didn't hurt B5 (or if it did, the show succeeded anyway). Isn't it more likely that the effects will be better on the new show? FX tend to improve with time.

Oh, I have faith. I'm just being Devil's Advocate, because like it or not JMS has written some pretty putrid stuff in his lifetime. But that's any writer.

HOWEVER - Dylan Neal made a comment in the other thread that since this movie is a pilot, things aren't going to be perfect. That's understandable, but it also counts underneath this "design and technical problems" category, whether you like it or not.

6. Overestimation of market size.

Sci-fi is well aware that they cater to a niche market. Their target isn't the general public, it is science fiction audiences. I would think they are hoping to achieve the same success they are having with Farscape. Note that very few people actually watch it, but for the Sci-fi channel, it's a great success.
Perhaps the most important reason the Sci-fi channel has been increasing its viewership is exactly that: understanding its audience.

This is another thing that Sci-Fi does well. Have you ever noticed *where* the ads for Farscape - other than the ones on the Sci-Fi Channel itself - run? Very sneaky.

7. Poor promotion.

This isn't directed at Channe, but at everybody: I am so f***in' fed up with all the bitching about no promotion. They are totally promoting it. Trailers came out. The Crusade marathon. Their web site. They would not invest in it without marketing. If anything, the biggest mistake of a lot of companies recently has been too much marketing (.com companies, for example). There will be commercials when the movie and/or show approaches. What do expect, planes writing the "Watch B5:Rangers in the sky?" A smaller network does smaller promotion, it's that simple. And oversaturation is not a good thing. I doubt I'm the only one sick of all the Survivor ads.

Yes, of course they're going to promote the hell out of it.

I wasn't bitching about the amount of promotion. Sci-Fi can put a lot of money into promoting the thing, but they have to do it in the correct channels. They succeeded doing this once with Farscape, and even the Invisible Man. They can do this with Rangers. It's just if they don't... well, the show is screwed. Poor promotion also counts for the *channels* the promotion goes through, as well as the actual *amount* of promotion.

8. Insufficient distribution.

Again, the show wouldn't be targetting everyone, it would be targetting sci-fi audiences who, yes, actually get the sci-fi channel. No show will ever get canned because people who logistically had no possible way of watching didn't watch. That's expecting the impossible, and ratings don't depend on the impossible, they're just about people watching some TV

Ok, I concede on this point. However - does this also include reruns of the movie? Yes? No? Rangers runs a better chance of success if it's rerun a couple times (e.g. Crusade, for example, or the following B5 has built since it's airing on Sci-Fi.)

--

I'm being pretty realistic with this, I think, and I'm not panicking. I have bigger things to panic about - such as the rest of my life
smile.gif


Of course there are going to be those threads. We *know* Delenn and Garibaldi. Right now we don't know Martel and Dulann and the others. Ever been in a lit class? Human brains are hardwired for comparison and contrast... we do that with anything, even unconsciously (hmm, I think that melon's less squishy than that other melon... I don't like that melon, because it's squishier than the melon I had last week...)

------------------
Channe, the pseudo-Ranger, who lives for the One and dies for the chocolate cheesecake
--
OnlineDude: I suppose now would not be the time to bring up the old one about the starlet who was so new to Hollywood she slept with the writer...
JMS: But that was only because she heard that in Hollywood, *everyone* screws the writer.
--
"Foreshadowing! Your key to quality literature!" -Berkeley Breathed
 
I'm not a pessimist.

I get paid to figure out a plan, and then figure out what can go wrong with that plan. Everything that can and would possibly be a problem with that plan, I have to think about and provide escape clauses for. It's literally part of my job description. I enjoy it.
smile.gif


Just in case you wanted to know why I was doing this...

(Oh yeah, and a small comment on one of the things above that might get some of your feathers in a ruffle. The part about JMS writing some bad stuff
smile.gif
EVERY writer has his bad days, as JMS does. I think he's great. I think he's one of the best screenwriters on the planet. However, I have seen moments in his work that just make me *cringe.* And at this point, all we have for dialouge is a witticism thrown between two characters, the Ranger credo, and a bit spoken by a member of the Grey Council.

It's like me. Sometimes I write fantastic press releases. Once, I wrote a press release or two that my boss told me she wouldn't send out because it would actually *turn off* the audience from coming to the event.

Well - maybe I shouldn't have posted this thread, as it came across as something outside of what I actually wanted it to be in the first place. Sorry, folks.

------------------
Channe, the pseudo-Ranger, who lives for the One and dies for the chocolate cheesecake
--
OnlineDude: I suppose now would not be the time to bring up the old one about the starlet who was so new to Hollywood she slept with the writer...
JMS: But that was only because she heard that in Hollywood, *everyone* screws the writer.
--
"Foreshadowing! Your key to quality literature!" -Berkeley Breathed
 
Ok, channe, you were bringing up the worst-case scenario. That's fine. But there are those out there who could read this and start getting silly about it, not understanding you intentions. Trust me, I have a lot of experience with people taking things I say the wrong way. So, I figured I'd counter the points for those people.

However, I still don't see how Enterprise is really competition for Rangers. The analogy with construction toys is faulty: most parents will buy only one construction toy, or choose one company, for their children. TV viewers, however, usually watch more than one show, especially in the same genre. Assuming most of us at least occasionally watch B5, how many of us also watch Farscape, or X-Files, or TNG reruns, or even Enterprise? One may even say that Enterprise can help Rangers, if it creates more of an interest in TV sci-fi. Some people who aren't into sci-fi might see Enterprise, like it, then watch Rangers to get more like that. A lot of Trekkies don't like the newer Trek shows, so they might run to Rangers as an alternative.

------------------
"You do not make history. You can only hope to survive it."

[This message has been edited by GKarsEye (edited October 17, 2001).]
 
*plops down in couch eating popcorn* This is better then the Brit parliment arguing. Keep going!!!

------------------
I'm a simple man. All I want is enough sleep for two normal men, enough whiskey for three, and enough women for four.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by channe:
The part about JMS writing some bad stuff
smile.gif
EVERY writer has his bad days, as JMS does. I think he's great. I think he's one of the best screenwriters on the planet.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>It also can not be repeated enough that his current comics work is getting great sales and critical aclaim. He's arguably better now then ever.


------------------
You are not entitled to your own opinion. You are only entitled to your own informed opinion.
-- Harlan Ellison qouting Gustave Flaubert
 
Sure JMS wrote some awful things, but it makes being a fan more fun. We get to make fun of it. Who among us here hasn't had some good laughs over the Zargh monster?

Also, JSM will not be doing all or even most of the writing. He specifically wants to have less involvement with the writing, that's why Rangers will not have as strong an arc as B5.

Channe, I didn't mean that you "shouldn't have posted this." My greatest failing in dealing with people is that I debate/argue/discuss with full gusto, without pleasantries and smiley face thingies. Sometimes it comes off as being more confrontational or ruder than I wanted, especially when posting on message boards.

------------------
"You do not make history. You can only hope to survive it."
 
Mindwalker - as you wish! GKarsEye, shall we? See below. I understand now what you're doing. Let's try to clear things up.

Drakh- I have the highest respect for JMS. He's done what people like me, nine-to-fivers churning out dead copy, only dream of doing. He gets paid to *tell stories* And boy, does he tell them well. I want to be JMS when I grow up.
smile.gif


There's a difference, though, between the "fan" attitude many B5-lovers have, which is the sort of thing you see a lot - the philosophy that just because it comes from JMS' brain, it'll be platinum. That's like saying that just because the orange is a Sunkist, it's gonna be a good-tasting orange. Most times, yes, it's the best orange you've ever tasted. But sometimes, it's not. The more accurate thing to do - and maybe I'm a skeptic here - is to trust that it'll be good, but understand if it isn't.

I'm trusting that Rangers will be good, because I've read his work for Spiderman and some of the stuff coming out now. It's all good. It's all amazing. I don't think Rangers will be any different.

About the competition aspect of it. Let me try to explain clearer.

ER and Chicago Hope are both shows about doctors in dire situations with patients in dire situations. Now, they're not on at the same time, and there are people that certainly watch both. But, yes, they are in competition - both of them are always trying to catch the viewer's eye with better stories, better material. They want to be The Best Doctor Show. If not, they're in danger of being cancelled.

I admit it, if I had UPN access I'd be tuning into Enterprise. The nature of the competition between Enterprise and Rangers will be that kind of "we want to be the best ship-based science fiction adventure." Now, there's a lot more going on behind the scenes of Hollywood that I don't know about, but there are perks for shows that are The Best. A lot of perks.

It comes down to this - Paramount has a Product, and Warners has a Product. Both of them want to Sell the Product. The audience might buy both Bounty paper towels and Cheer paper towels indiscriminately, but the one that outsells the other can buy more shelf space... and in turn, be more visible to the audience. If Bounty does this, Cheer has to do something or lose a lot of its market share.

Is this clearer?

------------------
Channe, the pseudo-Ranger, who lives for the One and dies for the chocolate cheesecake
--
OnlineDude: I suppose now would not be the time to bring up the old one about the starlet who was so new to Hollywood she slept with the writer...
JMS: But that was only because she heard that in Hollywood, *everyone* screws the writer.
--
"Foreshadowing! Your key to quality literature!" -Berkeley Breathed
 
Yes, channe, it is clearer, thank you. Please understand that I know little about the 'Biz.' I'm a software engineer.

However, if the competition is indeed about which show will be more popular (like the paper towel analogy you gave), then it's pretty obvious who will win: Enterprise. First of all, it's Trek, which is the single most popular sci-fi TV franchise in history, and will be for a while. Second of all, it's on a network. But Rangers doesn't need to be the most popular. It just needs to be good enough to stay on the air.

If the competition is about which is better in terms of quality, then that sort of thing is subjective and often has little to do with popularity. I'm willing to bet the Rangers will be a better show, but not more popular.

------------------
"You do not make history. You can only hope to survive it."
 
Enterprise and Rangers are only full competitors if they are on in the same week. They can avoid competing if Enterprise shows October to December and April to June whilst Rangers does the other 6 months.

------------------
Andrew Swallow
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by channe:
I've been meaning to get around to this. There are a couple main reasons why a product fails, and I noticed that ALL of them could really apply to Rangers...
...8. Insufficient distribution. This could be a problem - not everyone gets the Sci-Fi Channel, therefore not everyone who would watch the show can.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Distribution...that's a real intersting aspect of this whole 'Rangers needs to do well to be a series' issue. I don't know beans about the wide, complicated world of getting TV shows from one country to another, but I do know that more and more, TV programs attract a multi-national following.
Why restrict a venture that will in effect 'make or break ' a potential series to only one of it's potential markets? Does it cost so much more to make more than one copy and generate revenue and interest in ALL potential markets? Couldn't Canadians and Brits and Aussies and fans from all over the world be just as important to a final decision as the American viewer?

The SciFi website promotes Rangers to the whole world but doesn't make it's telemovie available to all it's potential fans at the same time. Can someone provide me some insight into this frustrating conundrum?
crazy.gif


We count too,
Terry Baker
B5 Fan from Canada

------------------
The avalance has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by terrytvgal:
Does it cost so much more to make more than one copy and generate revenue and interest in ALL potential markets
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, making new broadcast masters can be expensive. I believe that it's worse for motion pictures, because you're actually duplicating film rather than high-quality video tape, which is why there's usually a gap between US and UK releases - we in the UK are literally getting second-hand film. The other side of the question is making someone want to actually buy the show and negotiating a price agreeable to both parties. Broadcasters prefer to buy something that has been proven to work, as they can only buy so many series or movies in addition to the cost of producing their own individual material. Then there's the problems of making sure the material is in an appropriate format, any translation work that might be necessary ...

Does that help clear up the confusion?

But, on the bright side, you Canadians somehow get to see Enterprise the day before its home market in the US!
laugh.gif


------------------
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Delbert:


Does that help clear up the confusion?

But, on the bright side, you Canadians somehow get to see Enterprise the day before its home market in the US!
laugh.gif


<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Logistically,yes; emotionally no.
frown.gif


As for enterprise, I don't think ALL Canadins get it a day ahead, (thought I seem to recall something about Edmonton being a day ahead with some new series) in BC we get Enterprise on Wednesday which as far as I know is the same day as in the US.



------------------
The avalance has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.
 
Why someone would make a thread about a Rangers series failing before we ever see the potential pilot....


Boredom....

------------------
"Faith Manages"
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR> That's like saying that just because the orange is a Sunkist, it's gonna be a good-tasting orange. Most times, yes, it's the best orange you've ever tasted. But sometimes, it's not. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Personally, I prefer the Valencia orange.
tongue.gif


------------------
The 3 most common elements in the Universe:
Hydrogen, Greed, Stupidity!
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The One Who Was:


Boredom....

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


heh basically somthing to talk about, well at least til the tele movie arrive's
smile.gif


------------------
Deviot
Lincbot@yahoo.com.au
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 376 (members: 0, guests: 376)

Share this page

Back
Top