By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies Discussion - The Simpsons May Get Canceled!!! ...

Tagged games:

Simpsons Renewed Thru Season 25; Cast Comes to Agreement on Pay Cuts
In order for the long-running animated series to continue, the voice actors back down.

UPDATE: FOX has now officially confirmed The Simpsons will be back and that they have in fact renewed the series for not just one but two more seasons, meaning Season 24 and Season 25 of The Simpsons are on the way. This will bring the series to an astounding 559 episodes.


Not made explicit one way or the other is whether they intend for the show to end with Season 25… which likely means that decision is still not made yet.


Original story follows.


According to The Hollywood Reporter, The Simpsons' voice cast has agreed to a pay cut.


No, it won't be as severe as the 45% cut that FOX originally wanted last Monday, which would have dropped the $400,000 they get per episode to around $250,000. So this is somewhat of a small victory for the cast. But on the flip side of this is the fact that they still will not get any back-end percentage of the Simpsons franchise profits like they had originally countered with.


The cast includes: Dan Castellaneta (Homer, Grampa Simpson, Krusty the Clown, and others), Julie Kavner (Marge and others), Nancy Cartwright (Bart and others), Yeardley Smith (Lisa), Hank Azaria (Moe, Chief Wiggum and Apu), and Harry Shearer (Mr. Burns, Principal Skinner, and Ned Flanders, more…). Their decision to take a cut in salary follows the series producers themselves agreeing to a pay cut earlier this morning. But the big difference there is that the several of the producers, in fact, have the kind of "back end" deal that the cast wanted.


In fact, just this morning Harry Shearer released a statement where he said "I'm willing to let them cut my salary not just 45% but more than 70% – down to half of what they said they would be willing to pay us. All I would ask in return is that I be allowed a small share of the eventual profits."


On a final note here, there was some talk that this, being probably the last salary negotiation the cast would ever go through, would be for one more, 24th and final season. As of this time there has been no update as to whether that is true or whether these cuts will allow the series to continue on past Season 24.


Source: http://tv.ign.com/articles/119/1199000p1.html

Yay!



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Around the Network

I don't have figures or anything, but, what can Fox possibly replace Simpsons with? I mean ignoring quality, Simpsons still brings Fox a lot of money (I'm assuming) and I doubt they will ever be able to replace that money maker. So what are they thinking?



sapphi_snake said:
Joelcool7 said:

Well all you Simpson fans can be relieved the cast and crew negotiated a pay cut that will allow the show to continue to be produced for at least another season. Fact is the Simpsons crew is one of the highest paid cartoon development teams in the world, I guess if they are willing to take this steep pay cut they must realize the importance of Simpsons to their careers and livelihoods.

However I do have to wonder if Fox executives are taking pay cuts? I mean television shows on Fox and other channels are becoming more and more expensive to produce and less and less revenue is coming in. It used to be a show got 3-million views it would remain on the air for a season it was acceptable. But this season a show got 5-million views and was dropped after three episodes.

Its like all the banks that laid off tons of staff and accepted bail outs, yet their executives barely saw a cut in their pay checks while everyone else within the companies suffered. I like Nintendo's approach where the companies leadership actually takes responsibility for the poor sales and takes a pay cut alongside any other staff receiving the cut.

A company is supposed to be a team, the boss is no good without the team. Sure the boss is important and deserves higher pay but why should the whole team take a pay cut while the executives remain unaffected. I mean really is it the teams fault that sales are winding down or bad business decisions were made by those in leadership? No, so why should the executives be protected at the cost of the developers who actually make the products?

LOL, you got it the other way around. In the past the top 10 shows used to average close to, or even more than 20 million viewers/episode. Nowadays a show is considered a hit if it manages to get 9-10 million viewers. A show that made just 3 million viewers would've been canceled after 1 episode in the past (granted, 3 million is just too low even for today's standards, unless we're talking about The CW).


Your right in the past some big shows did draw in larger amounts of viewers. But shows like say 7th Heaven was averaging 3-million views an episode after a few seasons. Touched by and Angel another show that saw several seasons averaged similar numbers in fact the show's highest numbers if I recall were around 11-million.

Looking at data from 2006 premier episodes did draw in numbers of about 20-million viewers. However I never stated that numbers have improved over the years, just that many shows failed to deliver the number of viewers shows this season did and weren't canned.

I'm not going to go further in this discussion as I am having a hard time finding actual viewer results that are global in comparison to national. Finding different results for the same shows on different sites so I'm guessing they are reporting national numbers and so fourth. Seece do you know a good source for global television viewership numbers?

If a show gets 5-million views in US alone and more globally then it should definitely remain on the air. I found numbers for American Dad that said the show gets around 3-million viewers and remains on the air, Family Guy only has 6.6-million so I am assuming these are national figures because programs are getting canned at the 5-million mark as they are considered a failure. But Family Guy barely did better and is called a success.



-JC7

"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer

 

Ya know, I've been talking shit about the series for over 5 years. But I'd be pretty disappointed if it actually got cancelled. It's still the Simpsons damn it, even if it sucks nowadays.



I am the black sheep     "of course I'm crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong."-Robert Anton Wilson

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni16391280/

Mr. Burns would say "excellent." But he's probably the only one. The Simpsons' six principal vocal talents have agreed to a pay cut in order to keep the pioneering, record-setting show on the air past its current 23rd season. And sure enough, after the back room dealing was over, Fox proudly announced that it had renewed The Simpsons for a 24th and 25th season. Meanwhile the salary cut was not the reported 45 percent that Fox was looking to slash from the budget, But guess who's willing to take a 70 percent(!) cut—in exchange for what he feels he and his fellow actors are rightly owed, of course? "The Fox people said [there were] simply no circumstances under which the network »



70 percent cut! What were they being paid? I am surprised Azaria agreed to this since he is the bigger of the stars on that show other than the herman"s head girl.



    The NINTENDO PACT 2015[2016  Vgchartz Wii U Achievement League! - Sign up now!                      My T.E.C.H'aracter

Around the Network
Joelcool7 said:


Your right in the past some big shows did draw in larger amounts of viewers. But shows like say 7th Heaven was averaging 3-million views an episode after a few seasons. Touched by and Angel another show that saw several seasons averaged similar numbers in fact the show's highest numbers if I recall were around 11-million.

Looking at data from 2006 premier episodes did draw in numbers of about 20-million viewers. However I never stated that numbers have improved over the years, just that many shows failed to deliver the number of viewers shows this season did and weren't canned.

I'm not going to go further in this discussion as I am having a hard time finding actual viewer results that are global in comparison to national. Finding different results for the same shows on different sites so I'm guessing they are reporting national numbers and so fourth. Seece do you know a good source for global television viewership numbers?

If a show gets 5-million views in US alone and more globally then it should definitely remain on the air. I found numbers for American Dad that said the show gets around 3-million viewers and remains on the air, Family Guy only has 6.6-million so I am assuming these are national figures because programs are getting canned at the 5-million mark as they are considered a failure. But Family Guy barely did better and is called a success.

7th Heaven was on the WB, a channel that has lower tsandards when it comes to raitings. It was actually that channels no. 1 show for most of it's run. Touched by an Angel was a massive success for 4 of it's seasons (it was in the top 5 in the US at one point). It's no surprise that they weren't canceled.

Global TV numbers aren't very important for US companies. A lot of shows who aren't very popular in the US are very watched worldwide (for example Lost was in the top 5 worldwide for its entire run, while it was barely in the top 20 in US). One of the most watched shows worldwide ever, Baywatch (about 100 million viewers/episode), was actually canceled in the US, and then returned to syndication. It never got good ratings there.

In the US nowadays what's most important is the rating in the key demo group (18-49 year olds). The Simpsons and Family Guy actually get the highest ratings Sunday nights in the key demo amongst scripted shows, and that's all that matters.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

sapphi_snake said:
Joelcool7 said:


Your right in the past some big shows did draw in larger amounts of viewers. But shows like say 7th Heaven was averaging 3-million views an episode after a few seasons. Touched by and Angel another show that saw several seasons averaged similar numbers in fact the show's highest numbers if I recall were around 11-million.

Looking at data from 2006 premier episodes did draw in numbers of about 20-million viewers. However I never stated that numbers have improved over the years, just that many shows failed to deliver the number of viewers shows this season did and weren't canned.

I'm not going to go further in this discussion as I am having a hard time finding actual viewer results that are global in comparison to national. Finding different results for the same shows on different sites so I'm guessing they are reporting national numbers and so fourth. Seece do you know a good source for global television viewership numbers?

If a show gets 5-million views in US alone and more globally then it should definitely remain on the air. I found numbers for American Dad that said the show gets around 3-million viewers and remains on the air, Family Guy only has 6.6-million so I am assuming these are national figures because programs are getting canned at the 5-million mark as they are considered a failure. But Family Guy barely did better and is called a success.

7th Heaven was on the WB, a channel that has lower tsandards when it comes to raitings. It was actually that channels no. 1 show for most of it's run. Touched by an Angel was a massive success for 4 of it's seasons (it was in the top 5 in the US at one point). It's no surprise that they weren't canceled.

Global TV numbers aren't very important for US companies. A lot of shows who aren't very popular in the US are very watched worldwide (for example Lost was in the top 5 worldwide for its entire run, while it was barely in the top 20 in US). One of the most watched shows worldwide ever, Baywatch (about 100 million viewers/episode), was actually canceled in the US, and then returned to syndication. It never got good ratings there.

In the US nowadays what's most important is the rating in the key demo group (18-49 year olds). The Simpsons and Family Guy actually get the highest ratings Sunday nights in the key demo amongst scripted shows, and that's all that matters.

Thank you for your explanations, being Canadian I see different channels then Americans do. 7th Heaven was on a prime time channel and so was Touched By an Angel. I never thought of the fact that WB was struggling so much in the US to get large amounts of viewers.

I must say the whole US dependance thing is very foolish for television companies to do. One of the biggest television shows to come out of Canada "Little Mosque on the prarie" actually didn't perform amazing so to speak in Canada. But gained global celebrity status so popular that almost every major network in the Middle East wanted to run it. It ended up being viewed across the EU and ME. The show remains on the air due to its global success.

If a television show is bringing in that many viewers around the globe then those views should be profitting the creators. Royalties and income come in every time an episode is aired around the globe. So if a show does amazing globally but doesn't do amazing in the US it should most definatly not be cancelled.

Are American companies the only ones who care soully about the US market? It seems Canadian firms care more about the global market then domestic. I know other countries care a lot about global market capabilities as well. Its extremely dangerous to only care about your home market if your product is wildly successful in other regions.

What do I think the networks should do? If a show isn't successful much in the US but huge globally change the air time and dates the program airs in the US to a time when it has the least competition. If the series is bleeding money and foreign numbers while amazing aren't enough to justify keeping the series on the air in the US, out source it to another company. I'm sure another company would see potential in the series. Maybe even consider partnering up with a network from another country to finance the show, if it is successful else where around the globe the series is probably very valuable to a foreign partner.

Cancelling a show that has millions of viewers should be a last resort. If the show flops and by that I mean under 3 million viewers in the US and has no success globally then it should be terminated. But their is money to be made and investments have been made. What harm can come out of selling or liscensing a program out to a smaller firm or even competitor? If your going to cancel the program anyways you might as well make money on royalties or the sale of the series to a competitor.



-JC7

"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer

 

Joelcool7 said:

Thank you for your explanations, being Canadian I see different channels then Americans do. 7th Heaven was on a prime time channel and so was Touched By an Angel. I never thought of the fact that WB was struggling so much in the US to get large amounts of viewers.

I must say the whole US dependance thing is very foolish for television companies to do. One of the biggest television shows to come out of Canada "Little Mosque on the prarie" actually didn't perform amazing so to speak in Canada. But gained global celebrity status so popular that almost every major network in the Middle East wanted to run it. It ended up being viewed across the EU and ME. The show remains on the air due to its global success.

If a television show is bringing in that many viewers around the globe then those views should be profitting the creators. Royalties and income come in every time an episode is aired around the globe. So if a show does amazing globally but doesn't do amazing in the US it should most definatly not be cancelled.

Are American companies the only ones who care soully about the US market? It seems Canadian firms care more about the global market then domestic. I know other countries care a lot about global market capabilities as well. Its extremely dangerous to only care about your home market if your product is wildly successful in other regions.

What do I think the networks should do? If a show isn't successful much in the US but huge globally change the air time and dates the program airs in the US to a time when it has the least competition. If the series is bleeding money and foreign numbers while amazing aren't enough to justify keeping the series on the air in the US, out source it to another company. I'm sure another company would see potential in the series. Maybe even consider partnering up with a network from another country to finance the show, if it is successful else where around the globe the series is probably very valuable to a foreign partner.

Cancelling a show that has millions of viewers should be a last resort. If the show flops and by that I mean under 3 million viewers in the US and has no success globally then it should be terminated. But their is money to be made and investments have been made. What harm can come out of selling or liscensing a program out to a smaller firm or even competitor? If your going to cancel the program anyways you might as well make money on royalties or the sale of the series to a competitor.

I actually think you're forgetting the fact that your country is quite small compared to the US (in terms of population of course). 3 million viewers in Canada is the equivalent of 30 million viewers in the US. That show you mentioned is considered a huge ratings hit in your country.

In the US networks get their money from sponsors. If a show isn't doing well the sponsors pull out, and there will be no more money to make the show. Selling the show to another network usually doesn't work because most networks hesitate to buy shows that failed.

BTW, what kind of nale is Little Mosque on the Prarie? Sounds so funny. It's the funniest one I've heard since Good Christian Bitches (can't wait 'till that show starts next year).



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Joelcool7 said:
sapphi_snake said:
Joelcool7 said:


Your right in the past some big shows did draw in larger amounts of viewers. But shows like say 7th Heaven was averaging 3-million views an episode after a few seasons. Touched by and Angel another show that saw several seasons averaged similar numbers in fact the show's highest numbers if I recall were around 11-million.

Looking at data from 2006 premier episodes did draw in numbers of about 20-million viewers. However I never stated that numbers have improved over the years, just that many shows failed to deliver the number of viewers shows this season did and weren't canned.

I'm not going to go further in this discussion as I am having a hard time finding actual viewer results that are global in comparison to national. Finding different results for the same shows on different sites so I'm guessing they are reporting national numbers and so fourth. Seece do you know a good source for global television viewership numbers?

If a show gets 5-million views in US alone and more globally then it should definitely remain on the air. I found numbers for American Dad that said the show gets around 3-million viewers and remains on the air, Family Guy only has 6.6-million so I am assuming these are national figures because programs are getting canned at the 5-million mark as they are considered a failure. But Family Guy barely did better and is called a success.

7th Heaven was on the WB, a channel that has lower tsandards when it comes to raitings. It was actually that channels no. 1 show for most of it's run. Touched by an Angel was a massive success for 4 of it's seasons (it was in the top 5 in the US at one point). It's no surprise that they weren't canceled.

Global TV numbers aren't very important for US companies. A lot of shows who aren't very popular in the US are very watched worldwide (for example Lost was in the top 5 worldwide for its entire run, while it was barely in the top 20 in US). One of the most watched shows worldwide ever, Baywatch (about 100 million viewers/episode), was actually canceled in the US, and then returned to syndication. It never got good ratings there.

In the US nowadays what's most important is the rating in the key demo group (18-49 year olds). The Simpsons and Family Guy actually get the highest ratings Sunday nights in the key demo amongst scripted shows, and that's all that matters.

Thank you for your explanations, being Canadian I see different channels then Americans do. 7th Heaven was on a prime time channel and so was Touched By an Angel. I never thought of the fact that WB was struggling so much in the US to get large amounts of viewers.

I must say the whole US dependance thing is very foolish for television companies to do. One of the biggest television shows to come out of Canada "Little Mosque on the prarie" actually didn't perform amazing so to speak in Canada. But gained global celebrity status so popular that almost every major network in the Middle East wanted to run it. It ended up being viewed across the EU and ME. The show remains on the air due to its global success.

If a television show is bringing in that many viewers around the globe then those views should be profitting the creators. Royalties and income come in every time an episode is aired around the globe. So if a show does amazing globally but doesn't do amazing in the US it should most definatly not be cancelled.

Are American companies the only ones who care soully about the US market? It seems Canadian firms care more about the global market then domestic. I know other countries care a lot about global market capabilities as well. Its extremely dangerous to only care about your home market if your product is wildly successful in other regions.

What do I think the networks should do? If a show isn't successful much in the US but huge globally change the air time and dates the program airs in the US to a time when it has the least competition. If the series is bleeding money and foreign numbers while amazing aren't enough to justify keeping the series on the air in the US, out source it to another company. I'm sure another company would see potential in the series. Maybe even consider partnering up with a network from another country to finance the show, if it is successful else where around the globe the series is probably very valuable to a foreign partner.

Cancelling a show that has millions of viewers should be a last resort. If the show flops and by that I mean under 3 million viewers in the US and has no success globally then it should be terminated. But their is money to be made and investments have been made. What harm can come out of selling or liscensing a program out to a smaller firm or even competitor? If your going to cancel the program anyways you might as well make money on royalties or the sale of the series to a competitor.

I hear what you're saying, being Canadian myself, thing is a lot of shows made here are made joined with other nations.  Lexx was made with Germany for instance, most shows that Global used to show were done with U.S. companies.  Marathon produces a lot of shows with France.  YTV used to share things with Nickelodeon (Are You Afraid of the Dark), etc.



sapphi_snake said:
Joelcool7 said:

Thank you for your explanations, being Canadian I see different channels then Americans do. 7th Heaven was on a prime time channel and so was Touched By an Angel. I never thought of the fact that WB was struggling so much in the US to get large amounts of viewers.

I must say the whole US dependance thing is very foolish for television companies to do. One of the biggest television shows to come out of Canada "Little Mosque on the prarie" actually didn't perform amazing so to speak in Canada. But gained global celebrity status so popular that almost every major network in the Middle East wanted to run it. It ended up being viewed across the EU and ME. The show remains on the air due to its global success.

If a television show is bringing in that many viewers around the globe then those views should be profitting the creators. Royalties and income come in every time an episode is aired around the globe. So if a show does amazing globally but doesn't do amazing in the US it should most definatly not be cancelled.

Are American companies the only ones who care soully about the US market? It seems Canadian firms care more about the global market then domestic. I know other countries care a lot about global market capabilities as well. Its extremely dangerous to only care about your home market if your product is wildly successful in other regions.

What do I think the networks should do? If a show isn't successful much in the US but huge globally change the air time and dates the program airs in the US to a time when it has the least competition. If the series is bleeding money and foreign numbers while amazing aren't enough to justify keeping the series on the air in the US, out source it to another company. I'm sure another company would see potential in the series. Maybe even consider partnering up with a network from another country to finance the show, if it is successful else where around the globe the series is probably very valuable to a foreign partner.

Cancelling a show that has millions of viewers should be a last resort. If the show flops and by that I mean under 3 million viewers in the US and has no success globally then it should be terminated. But their is money to be made and investments have been made. What harm can come out of selling or liscensing a program out to a smaller firm or even competitor? If your going to cancel the program anyways you might as well make money on royalties or the sale of the series to a competitor.

I actually think you're forgetting the fact that your country is quite small compared to the US (in terms of population of course). 3 million viewers in Canada is the equivalent of 30 million viewers in the US. That show you mentioned is considered a huge ratings hit in your country.

In the US networks get their money from sponsors. If a show isn't doing well the sponsors pull out, and there will be no more money to make the show. Selling the show to another network usually doesn't work because most networks hesitate to buy shows that failed.

BTW, what kind of nale is Little Mosque on the Prarie? Sounds so funny. It's the funniest one I've heard since Good Christian Bitches (can't wait 'till that show starts next year).


Umm not once in this thread have I actually mentioned 3-million Canadian viewers in fact I don't think I used Canadian numbers once mentioning an actual number. The number for 7th Heaven was the one the company gave a while ago and the stats for Touched By an Angel I am pretty sure were American as well.

I understand networks get their money from sponsors. Big sponsors may pull out but give it a different time slot that is less important. There are plenty of television shows that perform lower then Simpsons that are on the air, they have sponsors. Now if Simpsons is so bad that it becomes one of the worst performing shows on the network, there are other networks with lower amounts of viewers for their programming. Simpsons would be a catch for a smaller network as would a program like Play Boy Club, of course cutting costs and staff would be necessary. Meaning pay cuts like we saw with Simpsons but the series is still feasible and profitable.

As long as a product is profitable and competitive at all then it shouldn't be dropped at least that's my opinion. If a business has a successful product sure when they create more successful products shift focus to those but don't abandon a successful product just because it is no longer your golden goose. I a strong believer in expanding to accommodate new products rather then remaining still, if a product is successful but not enough to maintain support hand it off to another company for royalties or a lump sum. There is no reason a viable profitable product should be dropped.

As for Little Mosque on the Prairie

 



-JC7

"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer