|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
I more clearly sees how it is here in DVDTalks. wm lopez is attacks because he represents our Pahlin. In that what he says is clearly bullshits crazy but the left-wing media nuts of DVD Talk twists his words with Facts and true historical accounts. This is no fair and it will cause our chosen one to reconsider. His ramblings are the divine channeling of Palin and what Obama wishes he felt in his hearts of the world.
I supports you wm lopez for speakings the message and not fearing how many brain cells burn up as a results. |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by Nefarious
(Post 9958729)
I more clearly sees how it is here in DVDTalks. wm lopez is attacks because he represents our Pahlin. In that what he says is clearly bullshits crazy but the left-wing media nuts of DVD Talk twists his words with Facts and true historical accounts. This is no fair and it will cause our chosen one to reconsider. His ramblings are the divine channeling of Palin and what Obama wishes he felt in his hearts of the world.
I supports you wm lopez for speakings the message and not fearing how many brain cells burn up as a results. |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Damn my head hurts now...
|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Watching the Freebird segment again, the look of joy on Conan's face is great.
|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by Nefarious
(Post 9958729)
I more clearly sees how it is here in DVDTalks. wm lopez is attacks because he represents our Pahlin. In that what he says is clearly bullshits crazy but the left-wing media nuts of DVD Talk twists his words with Facts and true historical accounts. This is no fair and it will cause our chosen one to reconsider. His ramblings are the divine channeling of Palin and what Obama wishes he felt in his hearts of the world.
I supports you wm lopez for speakings the message and not fearing how many brain cells burn up as a results. |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by Dean Kousoulas
(Post 9958685)
Can't feel too bad for Conan. He got $45 million dollars after all.
Great way to end the show, though. |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by stingermck
(Post 9958773)
Watching the Freebird segment again, the look of joy on Conan's face is great.
|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by RoyalTea
(Post 9958720)
THIS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH CONAN'S RATINGS. NONE. NOTHING. ZERO. ZIPPO. NADA.
|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
I think they still would have tried to get him to shift. The problem was they couldn't keep Jay in that timeslot and had to do something with him. Jay had made it obvious that he wouldn't do earlier or even a shorter show in the same time.
I think we can be fairly certain Jay would would be unwilling to go on after Conan. NBC was stuck from the deal they made with Jay and for keeping him. Jay was no friend of the network or Conan. |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by WallyOPD
(Post 9958811)
So you think if Conan's Tonight Show had the same ratings as Jay's, or even improved on them, that NBC would still have dumped him and returned Jay to the timeslot?
If Conan's ratings were exactly the same, or even a little worse, but it was Conan with the ironclad $150 million buyout clause and NBC could have dumped Leno for a fraction of the price, we'd be saying a final goodbye to Jay Leno. |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
awesome speech and fantastic sendoff. :up:
|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by Nefarious
(Post 9958817)
The problem was they couldn't keep Jay in that timeslot and had to do something with him.
As we have seen, "pay them to go away" is an option. |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by GuessWho
(Post 9958841)
No...
As we have seen, "pay them to go away" is an option. I do think that affiliate demands have a lot to do with this, though. I think they wanted Jay after their news and NBC bowed to their demands. |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
It would cost a lot more to pay Jay to go away.
|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by Jimmy James
(Post 9958846)
The rumor is that Jay's payday would have been more than triple Conan's package.
I do think that affiliate demands have a lot to do with this, though. I think they wanted Jay after their news and NBC bowed to their demands. |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by Nefarious
(Post 9958729)
I more clearly sees how it is here in DVDTalks. wm lopez is attacks because he represents our Pahlin. In that what he says is clearly bullshits crazy but the left-wing media nuts of DVD Talk twists his words with Facts and true historical accounts. This is no fair and it will cause our chosen one to reconsider. His ramblings are the divine channeling of Palin and what Obama wishes he felt in his hearts of the world.
I supports you wm lopez for speakings the message and not fearing how many brain cells burn up as a results. This is a joke right? If it isnt a joke, and you were serious, please read my tagline below. |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
I would think the problem is that Jay failed in PRIMETIME wherethe money is made...yes there are late night talk show wars for ratings, but the numbers arent as big since they lose so much viewing audience, and it is more about what channel you chose to fall asleep to. Jay failing in a prime spot is what set this all in motion... If Jay had retired and simply faded away....I dont think we would be having this discussion at all.
|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by Super X
(Post 9958881)
I haven't been able to keep up with every little detail, but was it ever reported that affiliates wanted Jay specifically after the local news? All I can recall seeing was that they didn't want Jay before the local news as he was costing them ratings going into the local news.
|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by Count Dooku
(Post 9958617)
RoyalTea was asking about Late Night clips, not Tonight Show clips.
|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
The ratings for this show, oh my God:
Conan Saves His Best Ratings For Last Tonight Show Posted on 23 January 2010 by Robert Seidman Conan’s last turn as host of The Tonight Show garnered a 4.8 rating with adults 18-49 in the 25 local markets with Nielsen people meters. If those numbers hold up, not only is it a series high with adults 18-49 it’s 85% higher than the previous series high set Thursday night (2.6 rating), it’s over 40 percent better than the 3.4 rating with adults 18-49 Jay Leno got in his not-so-final Tonight Show after all on May 29. Leno’s not-so-final episode also scored nearly 12 million viewers. Viewer numbers for last night’s episode won’t be available until late next week. Not only was it better than all the late night and primetime competition on Friday — not really a huge feat with most networks broadcasting the Hope for Haiti Now benefit between 8p-10p, it was also a better 18-49 rating than any show got on Thursday night. Update: the previous series high, at least in final numbers (again the numbers above are preliminary) was a 3.8 rating with adults 18-49 for Conan’s Tonight Show premiere. Conan O’Brien’s final appearance as host of NBC’s “The Tonight Show” scored big ratings last night. The show not only won its time slot among the younger viewers that advertisers covet, it was No. 1 for the entire evening among all late-night and prime-time programs according to early numbers from NBC. According to preliminary data from Nielsen Co. provided by NBC, O’Brien’s last show registered a 7.0 rating and a 16 share, compared with “Late Show with David Letterman” with 2.5/5; “Nightline” with 2.8/6; “Jimmy Kimmel Live” with 1.3/4; “Late Night with Jimmy Fallon” with 3.3/10; and “Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson” with 1.5/4. The figures cover only metered markets. A ratings point represents about 1,149,000 households, or 1 percent of the estimated 114.9 million TV homes in the U.S. The share is the percentage of in-use TVs tuned to a given program. In addition, O’Brien’s final “Tonight Show” scored a 4. 8 rating among viewers aged 18-49. Its leading late-night competitor, “The Late Show with David Letterman,” scored a 0.6. O’Brien’s ratings had been soaring in his final week, handily beating some of his late-night rivals. On several nights recently, including Jan. 20 and Jan. 21, O’Brien registered higher numbers at 11:35 p.m. among viewers aged 18-49 than Jay Leno did in his prime-time show, “The Jay Leno Show.” |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by Brent L
(Post 9958909)
The ratings for this show, oh my God:
|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by RoyalTea
(Post 9958720)
we're going round in circles, circles.
we're going round in circles, circles. THIS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH CONAN'S RATINGS. NONE. NOTHING. ZERO. ZIPPO. NADA. Jay Leno wasn't performing. The decision to put a late night show into primetime five nights a week was a failure. If NBC fired Leno, they'd be on the hook for a $150 million buyout (which again begs the question, why does a guy who brags about not having an agent or manager, who brags about doing deals with a simple handshake, who said that Prime Time "will never work" feel the need to hammer out an airtight contract with an insane buyout for something that he feels is destined to fail anyway). NBC knew that there wasn't enough time in late night anymore for both of them. If they kept Conan, they'd have to pay Leno $150 million; if they kept Leno, they'd have to pay Conan SUBSTANTIALLY less. Again, if Jay Leno was kicking ass and taking names at 10:00, or if he retired and never took the job at 10, would Conan's job be anything less than completely and totally secure? Is it 100% Jay's fault? No. Is Jay completely blameless? Hell no. The decision in 2004 for Leno to retire and pass the torch on were clearly not made by Leno. But he went along with it. He had five years to say "I'm not ready to leave." He clearly wasn't ready to stop doing a late night talk show. His options were: find another network, or accept a job offer with NBC to do his show at 10. Even though he said that doing his show in prime time "will never work," he chose to stay with NBC. Do people really think that had everything to do with Jay being loyal to the network that forced him into early retirement against his will and nothing to do with Jay wanting to do whatever possible to steal Conan's job? |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
MOD NOTE:
Please leave the political talk out of this thread. It is off-topic and only starts arguments. If you see an off-topic post, do not respond, just report it. I will remove any future posts that do not adhere to this so we can keep this thread open. Thanks. |
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Damn. That show got better ratings than most of Leno's primetime shows for the entire duration he was on. rotfl
|
Re: NBC: let's see how low we can go (Conan thread, part 2)
Originally Posted by Jimmy James
(Post 9958901)
No, it hasn't been reported. We know that Jay's popularity with affiliates was a big part of the Jay/Dave decision, though. I also think it stands to reason that they complained that a portion of their viewers like the Leno show and were tuning out because they got to see it early. By putting it on after the news, that gives people incentive to watch the news and then go right into Leno.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:03 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.