An idea

[Radhil]

There are already a fair number of "Direct to Video" movie releases, so someone Must be making money from them.

Most of those are established franchises, and are almost always done on the ultra-cheap so that they do make money. Some direct-video releases are simply movies so bad that no one wanted to waste money to bring it to theatres. Disney is the only company that seems to make a real buck from it, and that's only because they raided their own classics to do it.

It might be done as you say, but it'd be a miracle on the level of Fox swearing off reality TV for the next ten years. It just won't happen.

[bakana]

There are already a fair number of "Direct to Video" movie releases, so someone Must be making money from them.

Not getting Rich, but making a profit.

So, yes, if a good series was moving along, priced Competitively, I can see it building an audience.

Warner & the like would never go for it.
With them it's Billions or Nothing.

Small, Indy producers would be the ones who would build such a business.

[Joseph DeMartino]

The economics of American teleivsion simply don't work this way. B5 made as much as it did on DVD because it had already run on first-run broadcast and cable TV around the world and then been in reruns for several years. This isn't anything like trying to launch a new, unseen, project on DVD.

Fox was talking about packaging another version of a serious hit, 24, as a direct-to-DVD series. The series would star unknowns and follow the normal 24 formula. The idea was that the nature of the concept made it ideal for DVD, and that people intrigued by that type of story might be inclined to get another 24 fix beyond what they got on TV. Using unknowns (and doing a contemporary show that can shoot on inexpensive locations in and around Los Angeles) would keep costs down so low that such a thing might be fiscally possible. But since the original rumors, I've never heard another word about this project. If Fox, the godfather of TV-on-DVD, doesn't think they can pull off a direct-to-DVD spin-off from a hit like 24) (in a world where every other hour of prime time network TV seems to be some version of either CSI or Law & Order), what do you think the chances are for an original SF series will expensive FX, make-up, props, sets and costumes is?

Regards,

Joe

is that as much as a show on TV would make from advertising?

Apples and oranges. The studio makes the money from DVD sales. The network or cable channel makes the money from the advertising that airs during the shows they run, not the studio. The networks pay a fee per episode to the studio for a given show. The network wants the advertising revenue to exceed that fee. The fee may or may not cover the actual production cost of each episode. Often a studio will collect less in fees for each episode of a series they produce and run up an enormous deficit until they accumulate 4 seasons or so and can resell it into syndiction. (And/or release the series on DVD)

[Dr Maturin]

Originally posted by Radhil
With no way to view it outside of dropping a large chunk of change, I don't think it would work. Word of mouth would be the only thing driving sales, and it'd be too slow to build.

I have heard ideas that TV should move to a subscription model - pay to see shows much like you'd pay to receive magazines. The tech to allow such a model is already moving, with Tivo and other digital recorders becoming a little more commonplace. That would put scifi shows at less of a mercy to network bullshit, like Firefly (and Farscape, I-man, Crusade, etc. etc. etc.) was.

Combine that with the straight to DVD idea, and maybe we have something.

I was going to further suggest a PPV type thing as a way to "get it out there." I am just tired of good shows being cancelled.

[Jan]

I prefer the subscription alternative personally. Thing is, even though I've enjoyed shows, most of them fall into the 'watch once, twice at most' catagory for me and I have no desire to own them.

B5 is the one that rewards repeat watching and I'm thrilled that I have all of it on DVD now. One more set and one more movie and I'll have all except TMoS.

Jan

[Radhil]

With no way to view it outside of dropping a large chunk of change, I don't think it would work. Word of mouth would be the only thing driving sales, and it'd be too slow to build.

I have heard ideas that TV should move to a subscription model - pay to see shows much like you'd pay to receive magazines. The tech to allow such a model is already moving, with Tivo and other digital recorders becoming a little more commonplace. That would put scifi shows at less of a mercy to network bullshit, like Firefly (and Farscape, I-man, Crusade, etc. etc. etc.) was.

Combine that with the straight to DVD idea, and maybe we have something.

[Dr Maturin]

We all know that direct-to-video movies are usually bad, but if sci-fi can't thrive on TV, would it be possible for shows like Firefly to make it on DVD sets alone? If B5 made half a bill on sales, according to JMS, is that as much as a show on TV would make from advertising? There is, of course, the fact that people would be taking a risk by buying a $50-100 set, but what if they had special screenings in front of a diverse crew of critics before release?

Thoughts?