The WB and B5

[B5JMS Poster]

Subject: The WB and B5
-----+-------------+--------------------------------------------------
 No. | DATE        |  FROM
-----+-------------+--------------------------------------------------
s  1: Jan 14, 1997: dianekde at aol.com (Diane K De)
+  6: Jan 14, 1997: cortese at netcom.com (Janis Maria C. C. Cortese)
*  7: Jan 14, 1997: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

From: dianekde at aol.com (Diane K De)
Lines: 21

I was just perusing the latest issue of Broadcasting and Cable Magazine
(1/13) and saw the following in an article about the WB Network:

"Producers of the syndicated WB TV drama Babylon 5 have talked to the
network about coming on board, but CEO Jamie Kellner has his eye on
another WB TV science fiction show for the near future--Star Voyager
Academy.  The drama is 'basically a West Point set a hundred years in the
future in space.  We kind of feel that's the direction we'd rather go than
picking up Babylon 5', Kellner said."

Given that B5 outrates (on a Nielsen basis) EVERYTHING on the current WB
schedule, despite running in different timeslots all over the country, I
think I'm going to send Mr. Kellner a simple message...

"Hello, idiot."

Why would anyone give up a sure thing (If B5 got the same rating on the WB
as it gets in syndication it would instantly be their number one show) for
something unproven and dopey sounding?



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

From: cortese at netcom.com (Janis Maria C. C. Cortese)
Lines: 33

In article <5bgdhn$85j at fletch.fix.net> rick at fletch.fix.net (Rick Castello) writes:
>In article <19970113174900.MAA03313 at ladder01.news.aol.com>,
>Diane K De <dianekde at aol.com> wrote:
>
>>Given that B5 outrates (on a Nielsen basis) EVERYTHING on the current WB
>>schedule, despite running in different timeslots all over the country, I
>>think I'm going to send Mr. Kellner a simple message...
>>
>>"Hello, idiot."
>>
>>Why would anyone give up a sure thing (If B5 got the same rating on the WB
>>as it gets in syndication it would instantly be their number one show) for
>>something unproven and dopey sounding?
>
>	WB would be smart to bet on "Crusade," but B5 is a missed boat 
>	for them.  Would you buy candles with only 1/5 left to burn?  
>	It doesn't matter how very, very brightly they burn, they've still 
>	only got a year left.

You used Trek as an example here -- your logic would follow equally for
a network that wouldn't take the last year of TNG and hence would lose
the next two series.

Take care,
Janis
cortese at netcom.com                        http://www.io.com/~cortese/
Homepage includes Feminism, Lefthanders, and Handgun Education Links!
================================<*>==================================
   There was an old man                Said with a laugh, "I
   From Peru, whose lim'ricks all      Cut them in half, the pay is
   Look'd like haiku. He               Much better for two."
                                              Emmet


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Lines: 11

Actually, the article got it wrong; at one point we went in to discuss the
sequel to B5 with the WB network, but we have never talked to them about
picking up B5, because we know that's not a possibility, given the
competition between the two arms of WB.


 jms




-***
-*** B5JMS SUBSCRIBERS: Replies to messages in this list go to the list
-*** maintainer, <b5jms-owner at cs.columbia.edu>.  If you want to reply
-*** elsewhere, adjust the "To" field.  The best way to reach JMS is to post
-*** to rastb5m, which can be done by sending email to <rastb5 at solon.com>.