|
Sprinkler Systems
Uhaul move
Lawn care
Roses and trees
Ford Parts
Chrysler Parts
Lake Powell
New IPod Touch Apps
New IPhone Apps
IPhone Apps
IPad Information
IPad Apps
Android APPS
Android Games APPS
Android Systems
Android Tablets APPS and Beyond
Smartphone Apps
Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools
Tablet PC
Car Sharing Car Leasing
Tabler Pc
Fly Fishing
Toyota Cars
Vacation Rentals
Stock market
NYSE
SSE Stock
Freight & Shipping News
Gluten
Lactose
Gout
My Coupon Life
Campgrounds Check
Outdoor
Kitchen Design and Redoo
Bath Remodeling
Palm Springs
Las Vegas Vacation Tipps
Lake Powell Boating
Homes for lease
Electric and green Car Blog
Pearls and diamonds
Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App
Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
|
Science Fiction » alt.startrek » Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise
| Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1439] |
Sa, 16 April 2005 08:27 |
|
http://www.trektoday.com/news/150405_01.shtml
Full transcript here.......
http://www.trekfansunited.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3630 &hl=
Q: Have you received a response from Paramount in regards to the
pitch?
Al_Vinci: I last got off the phone with Paramount less than an hour
ago.
Al_Vinci: My name is Al Vinci; I am a Canadian producer residing in
the United Kingdom. I am currently in Toronto, Canada. I first
appeared onscreen as a child in a Sophia Loren movie. I operated three
family live theatres. I have published 17 national monthly magazines.
I was part of a production/creative team for an ethnic syndicated
Canadian television series for over 11 years.
Al_Vinci: I first produced a U.S. nationally syndicated television
series in 1983, two more since then, and have had various screenplays
optioned. Two years ago I worked with a major news network to develop
a news/entertainment channel in the Third World. I'm currently in
development on two motion pictures that I have scripted.
Al_Vinci: A few days after the cancellation of ST:E, I approached Tim
Brazeal and Andrew Beardall. We found that we shared common goals and
aspirations for the future of the show and I decided to immediately
begin work under the Trek United aegis, responsible directly to Tim
Brazeal.
Al_Vinci: The only goal was to secure a deal with Paramount to produce
a fifth Season, hopefully followed by a 6 & 7.
Al_Vinci: I formulated a production plan with the collaboration of one
of Canada's most respected film/TV financing experts that we felt
would have the best shot of succeeding. The plan called for a joint
venture co-production with Paramount. I solicited the collaboration of
one of Canada’s top production companies with more than a dozen major
motion picture releases many featuring Academy-Award winning stars.
Al_Vinci: A financing package was put together which would add
approximately US$15 million from international sponsorships secured
according to a novel business model to the US$3 million in the Trek
United fund. It was clear that since this would be an investment and
not a donation the approximately $150,000 of fan donations would not
be required and returned. It was envisioned that two major global
brands would team up to “Present” ST:E.
Al_Vinci: There were also approaches made to Sky and other
international broadcasters to secure their participation. This sum of
US$18 million would add up to approximately half of the current ST:E
full season production budget, thereby making a 50/50 joint venture
financially possible.
Al_Vinci: Here are excerpts from the original pitch: >>>
Al_Vinci: The production itself can readily be re-launched. The sets
are currently in fold and hold status in LA and thus can easily be
transported. The cast is still under contract. The move to Canada
could shave approx. 20% off the already reduced Season 4 budget of
US$1.5million per episode and gain significant tax credits through
Telefilm Canada. It is imperative that the following aspect be
explicitly clear.
Al_Vinci: It is imperative that the following aspect be explicitly
clear. Our group has no rights to anything related to Paramount
property. The entire concept is to pitch to the people we have been in
constructive discourse with at Paramount so far, a comprehensive and
coherent professional joint venture with a 50/50 split which would
leave Paramount essentially with Domestic, Merchandising and DVD while
we take International rights.
Al_Vinci: From our side we could bring to the table an experienced and
savvy Canadian production company, a commitment to move the production
to the lower-budget Canadian sites, and half the US$36 million season
budget in cash. We have reason to believe that Paramount would be
quite interested in a deal structured in such a manner.
Al_Vinci: International broadcasters our group has spoken to,
including Sky, La7, etc. want a Season 5, 6 and 7. The business side
of it is solid enough. As long as everyone is on the same page, then
everyone can profit by a successful run with dramatically increased
ratings and major international sponsorship based on a unique business
model.
Al_Vinci: This prospect would only be for the continuation of ST:E.
Future TV series, motion pictures and any other media would not fall
within the purview of this co production. Paramount would continue to
maintain full rights to the entire franchise. >>>
Al_Vinci: In early March I conducted personal visits to a large number
of Canadian soundstages, including a one million square feet facility
used to house the Spruce Goose for Scorsese's The Aviator.
Al_Vinci: For the record, I was not knowingly the source of the March
rumour that the sets would be moved to Vancouver. I have no knowledge
where that came from.
Al_Vinci: At about the same time, I arranged for the Canadian producer
who was just then flying back from Asia to go directly to Los Angeles
in order to set up a meeting with one of the top three executives at
Paramount Studios. Due to the fact that this particular Paramount
executive was leaving town for several days, the face to face meeting
was scheduled but did not occur as planned at the last minute.
Al_Vinci: I then took over direct negotiations and had a detailed
conversation with this executive outlining our complete joint venture
co production pitch. His general demeanour was positive, he asked
incisive questions, asked for further information and at the end
replied, AND I QUOTE:
Al_Vinci: “This is an interesting proposal. Let me talk it over with
the other guys here and I'll get back to you.”
Al_Vinci: Why am I not revealing the names of some of these people
involved? Simple. In any negotiation, confidentiality is foremost.
Especially when you have a situation which is as vividly followed by
such a large number of people, the last thing I would ever do for the
sake of my professional ethics is to expose the executives I am
dealing with to a barrage of love/hate mail.
Al_Vinci: These people are professional executives doing their job.
Although they are well aware that emotions are running very high over
this issue, they also do not want their Personal Assistants stampeded
by non-stop phone calls. They must be given the freedom to perform
their duties with respect. ST:E is not their only responsibility.
Al_Vinci: They have a studio to run, and the Canadian producer has
other projects that he must concentrate on. I have given my word to
these people involved that I would not ever identify them to the
public until a production is realized and there is nothing short of a
subpoena which is going to make me break that promise.
Al_Vinci: It was my insistence that Tim Brazeal and the crew at Trek
United not reveal aspects of the negotiations which could jeopardize
them. We have seen staggering amount of accusations flying around,
some with basis, and many others without. The place for that is in the
online forums, not in the faces of the people active in sensitive
discussions on a major deal such as this.
Al_Vinci: I’m sure some people would have done it differently. Well,
it’s a free country and they’re free to do whatever they like. If they
think they can pitch Paramount more successfully then they should go
for it. As a lifetime Trek fan I would be very happy to see any way of
keeping Trek on the air succeed.
Al_Vinci: However, this is the way I am proceeding according to the
best of my abilities, and I continue to stand by every single aspect
of it.
Al_Vinci: I continue to have the maximum respect for Tim Brazeal,
Andrew Beardall and everyone at Trek United for their altruistic
volunteerism and enthusiasm. They have shown me nothing but
professionalism and support from day one.
Fund the Future....
www.trekunited.com
Watch the trailer
http://www.trekunited.com/news.php?id=15
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for SeasonFive of Enterprise [message #1443 ] |
Sa, 16 April 2005 11:08 |
|
<snip>
Um, Wow.
TBerk
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1456 ] |
Sa, 16 April 2005 18:04 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1459 ] |
Sa, 16 April 2005 20:07 |
|
I like this line:
"several companies who believed they had found the secret to making a profit
out of Enterprise."
IIf the show is good, we wouldn't need code-crackers to figure that out...
> Full transcript here.......
>
> http://www.trekfansunited.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3630 &hl=
> Q: Have you received a response from Paramount in regards to the
> pitch?
> Al_Vinci: I last got off the phone with Paramount less than an hour
> ago.
> http://www.trekunited.com/news.php?id=15
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1461 ] |
Sa, 16 April 2005 20:53 |
|
"Captain 20" <c20 [at] setyrtfj.77com> wrote in message
news:2wc8e.3168$Zr.2369 [at] lakeread08...
> I like this line:
>
> "several companies who believed they had found the secret to making a
profit
> out of Enterprise."
>
> IIf the show is good, we wouldn't need code-crackers to figure that out...
Not necessarily. haven't critically acclaimed shows been cancelled before
simply because the numbers weren't there?
>
>
> > Full transcript here.......
> >
> > http://www.trekfansunited.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3630 &hl=
> > Q: Have you received a response from Paramount in regards to the
> > pitch?
> > Al_Vinci: I last got off the phone with Paramount less than an hour
> > ago.
> > http://www.trekunited.com/news.php?id=15
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1462 ] |
Sa, 16 April 2005 21:32 |
|
> > IIf the show is good, we wouldn't need code-crackers to figure that
out...
>
> Not necessarily. haven't critically acclaimed shows been cancelled before
> simply because the numbers weren't there?
Point taken, but "critically acclaimed" and "Enterprise" usually don't go in
the same sentence. :)
--
"if federal judges have the final word over its meaning,
the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands
of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form
they please".
- Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1481 ] |
So, 17 April 2005 06:09 |
|
"Captain 20" <c20 [at] setyrtfj.77com> wrote in message
news:dLd8e.3173$Zr.2817 [at] lakeread08...
> > > IIf the show is good, we wouldn't need code-crackers to figure that
> out...
> >
> > Not necessarily. haven't critically acclaimed shows been cancelled
before
> > simply because the numbers weren't there?
>
> Point taken, but "critically acclaimed" and "Enterprise" usually don't go
in
> the same sentence. :)
LOL Until this last season I would have agreed. I think there are marked
improvements in season
4 that make the show well worth saving. Sadly, paramount is obviously one
that doesn't know a good
thing when it sees it.
>
> --
> "if federal judges have the final word over its meaning,
> the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands
> of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form
> they please".
>
> - Thomas Jefferson
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1482 ] |
So, 17 April 2005 05:49 |
|
> > Point taken, but "critically acclaimed" and "Enterprise" usually don't
go
> in
> > the same sentence. :)
>
> LOL Until this last season I would have agreed. I think there are marked
> improvements in season
> 4 that make the show well worth saving. Sadly, paramount is obviously one
> that doesn't know a good
> thing when it sees it.
I agree, to the extent that IMO the average S4 show has been an improvement
over the average S1-S3 show, but it's been very uneven. There have been some
real high spots (like the khan redux series) and some real stinkers as well
(last night's, eg - pure moralistic cheese).
But it doesn't suprise me that it hasn't been enough to reverse the
alienating effects on the overall audience of S1-S3 ...
--
"if federal judges have the final word over its meaning,
the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands
of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form
they please".
- Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1491 ] |
So, 17 April 2005 16:23 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1493 ] |
So, 17 April 2005 17:45 |
|
> You aren't kidding. When ENT showed its "No 1 fan favorite" episode two
> Fridays ago, it got less than 1.9 million viewers. So much for absolute
> favorite. It came in 119th out of 121 shows for the week and for the
> season-to-date came in as show number 160. I don't think TOS did
> anywhere near this bad and it was cancelled after 3 seasons. Sorry, but
> no way ENT deserves more favorable treatment than TOS.
Some of us who have critiqued TU's efforts to save Ent have been accused of
being "conspiracy theorists", but that's nothing compared to what some of
the TU types say. For example, the notion that UPN "politics" (whatever that
means) and not ratings explains Ent's cancellation.
That's silly - all one has to do is look at the ratings.
--
"if federal judges have the final word over its meaning,
the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands
of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form
they please".
- Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1494 ] |
So, 17 April 2005 18:51 |
|
"Captain 20" <c20 [at] setyrtfj.77com> wrote in message
news:4wv8e.3225$Zr.1700 [at] lakeread08...
>
> > You aren't kidding. When ENT showed its "No 1 fan favorite" episode two
> > Fridays ago, it got less than 1.9 million viewers. So much for absolute
> > favorite. It came in 119th out of 121 shows for the week and for the
> > season-to-date came in as show number 160. I don't think TOS did
> > anywhere near this bad and it was cancelled after 3 seasons. Sorry, but
> > no way ENT deserves more favorable treatment than TOS.
>
> Some of us who have critiqued TU's efforts to save Ent have been accused
of
> being "conspiracy theorists", but that's nothing compared to what some of
> the TU types say. For example, the notion that UPN "politics" (whatever
that
> means) and not ratings explains Ent's cancellation.
>
> That's silly - all one has to do is look at the ratings.
>
We've discussed at length why ratings on a network not universally carried
by cable
providers might be incorrect. So some of us believe it's silly to stick with
a ratings
platform that is outdated.
>
> --
> "if federal judges have the final word over its meaning,
> the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands
> of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form
> they please".
>
> - Thomas Jefferson
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1498 ] |
So, 17 April 2005 19:53 |
|
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 12:51:47 -0400, "Brenda" <invalid [at] invalid.invalid>
>
>We've discussed at length why ratings on a network not universally carried
>by cable
>providers might be incorrect. So some of us believe it's silly to stick with
>a ratings
>platform that is outdated.
>
Sorely outdated. And that recent article was the proof.
The are basically using the same system as the when Ozzie and Harriet
were on!
http://tinyurl.com/4nh2h
"For the past decade or so, watching television in America has been
defined by the families recruited by Nielsen Media Research who have
agreed to have an electronic meter attached to their televisions or to
record in a diary what shows they watch. This setup may not last much
longer. Just as programmers and advertisers are clamoring for a better
understanding of the television audience, a wave of new consumer
products has made it increasingly difficult to satisfy them. One day
this January I sat in a Greenwich Village workroom with Bob Luff, the
chief technology officer at Nielsen, as he pulled out gadget after
gadget to show me what he's up against. Luff seemed to view the modern
American home as a digital zoo where the lion is about to lie down
with the lamb: radio is going on the Web, TV is going on cellphones,
the Web is going on TV and everything, it seems, is moving to
video-on-demand (V.O.D.) and (quite possibly) the iPod and the
PlayStation Portable. ''Television and media,'' Luff said over the
noise of five sets tuned to five different channels, ''will change
more in the next 3 or 5 years than it's changed in the past 50.''"
"Or maybe not so funny. Nielsen's introduction of new electronic
television meters in the New York area last winter, for instance,
prompted a torrent of criticism from Fox Television, which saw the
local ratings (and potential revenue) of several of its programs
suddenly plummet. But this may prove a modest dust-up compared with
what comes next, if devices like the P.P.M. or data from millions of
set-top digital cable boxes reveal that what Americans are seeing and
hearing do not correspond to what the big measurement companies have
long been claiming."
Fund the Future....
www.trekunited.com
Watch the trailer
http://www.trekunited.com/news.php?id=15
|
|
|
| TrekUnited Responds To Requests For More Information [message #1499 ] |
So, 17 April 2005 20:01 |
|
TU has this up at their web page.........
http://www.trekunited.com/news.php?id=36
TrekUnited Responds To Requests For More Information
Documents on financial status and business negotiations handed over to
third parties for verification
Posted by: Chris R. – 04.16.05
In the last weeks, the TrekUnited campaign to save Star Trek:
Enterprise has been asked to provide more information on the validity
of the conditions and guarantees for raising funds to sponsor a 5th
season, but in particular regarding the rightfulness of its assertions
concerning its dealings with Paramount, the official rightsholder to
the Star Trek franchise.
TrekUnited has always aimed to be as transparent as possible (not: as
necessary) regarding our dealings as a fan volunteer organization.
Unfortunately, we are restricted by the sensitivity of certain
information that cannot be released to the public, as well as the
nature of business negotations.
All conditions and guarantees regarding the fundraising have been
worked out with legal assistence from our attorney and fixed in a
legally binding terms of agreement. They have been available for
everyone to read on the net since we launched the online contributions
in mid February (http://www.trekunited.com/agreement.php). More
information on the bank that is keeping the money in trust funds had
to be removed from the net and is only available upon individual
request anymore, as requested by the bank, which had gotten an
increasing number of requests which it could not handle anymore on its
own. Any sensitive bank account information cannot be released
publicly on the net due to severe security concerns.
TrekUnited, Inc. has been in ongoing talks with a number of
departments and levels of Paramount since early March. Being
incorporated, we have been working on proposals with business
companies. However, no details on any deals may be revealed until
there is an outcome one way or another, to protect all parties
involved. As much as we'd like to keep all fans and supporters
up-to-date about everything - when this unwritten rule is violated
(and as has happened in the past in cases we neglected to adhere to
said rule) the other negotiating party can and will suspend all talks
indefinitely. This principle of confidentiality also covers the
identity of high-level sources at Paramount we have been talking to.
To remain credible and have any chance of success, we have to follow
the accepted rules and keep up confidentiality. Unfortunately, dealing
with large corporations with many departments and levels also means
that any dealings will require a certain amount of time. As we are the
requesting party, asking for a 5th season of Star Trek: Enterprise, we
have to adapt to that and any other demands, as required.
However, we are of course well aware of and understand the need for
clarity regarding the campaign especially in light of recent
developments. We aim to back up our assertions and provide tangible
evidence whenever possible. Our only motivation has been and is at
this time to bring back Enterprise for a fifth season by convincing
Paramount to produce new episodes and shop the show to a network or
cable channel. Within the last two months, everyone working for
TrekUnited has spent hundreds of hours of unpaid work to make this
goal a reality (the return of Enterprise being the only -potential-
"profit"), in some cases even put in a significant amount of money to
finance the server, rallies, flyer campaigns etc. Recent associations
with a merchandising company (LogoDogz) and Amazon, as pursued by many
self-financing websites and internet organizations, aim to reduce
these expenses that staff members had to completely waive on their
own.
This week, the staff has been trying to answer some of the questions
that have arisen, refute accusations and generally set the record
straight regarding our campaign. In order not to violate the
principles outlined above, we have chosen a way that does not violate
confidentiality but still allows us to give evidence for our
assertions: we have provided two respected genre news organizations
with full information on TrekUnited, who have agreed to verify them,
but do not release any sensitive details.
Earlier this week, TrekUnited has handed over bank information and
documents on our financial records to IGN Filmforce, whose editor had
offered to provide third party verification. It shall be noted with
regard to objectivity that this editor is not convinced that fan
fundraising campaigns work and has written critically about our
efforts in the past. While the organization has not yet been able to
provide a full report (scheduled to be released early next week), a
preliminary piece confirms the state of the non-interest bearing trust
account and more information regarding the fundraising. Find out more
at IGN Filmforce.
http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/604/604625p1.html
Concerning our business proposals, we have provided another news
source, TrekToday, with documents outlining our course of action in
the last weeks. While we have established and kept relations with
Paramount, we have worked together with a group of entertainment
companies in Canada to create a proposal for a co-production deal for
Enterprise's season 5. They would share costs under certain
conditions, while TrekUnited would work to promote Star Trek and its
vision for the future as it has within the last few months. We have
brought together Paramount and these production companies. TrekToday
posted an article with more in-depth information yesterday (04/15/05).
http://www.trektoday.com/news/150405_01.shtml
A related, brief live chat with the head of one of the Canadian
production companies provided more information on the proposal
( http://www.trekfansunited.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3630 &st=0).
Please stay tuned for more information on this and an upcoming
announcement this Sunday. A longer live chat with the Canadian
producer is scheduled for Sunday at 7pm EDT (midnight GMT) in our chat
room (to be accessed through Trek Fans United forum). Please note that
registration is required to participate in the chat.
For any remaining questions and concerns regarding our campaign,
please contact us at info [at] trekunited.com at any time, or get in touch
with our attorney, Mr. Andrew Beardall, Esq., at
attorney [at] trekunited.com. We'd like to thank the thousands of people
who have supported us in many ways in the last two months, and look
forward to your continued participation at TrekUnited.com.
Fund the Future....
www.trekunited.com
Watch the trailer
http://www.trekunited.com/news.php?id=15
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1501 ] |
So, 17 April 2005 20:07 |
|
> > That's silly - all one has to do is look at the ratings.
> >
>
> We've discussed at length why ratings on a network not universally carried
> by cable
> providers might be incorrect.
Yes, but as i explained, there's no reason to think the measurement error is
biased against Ent as opposed to for it, when compared to other shows. In
other words, if nielsen says Ent has a 2.5 rating, Ent's "real" rating might
be 2.7 or 2.3. And its ranking vs. other shows is probably the same.
> So some of us believe it's silly to stick with
> a ratings
> platform that is outdated.
But surely you know less about that than the owners of the show, who are in
the business and who have $$ riding on the outcome of those ratings?
--
"if federal judges have the final word over its meaning,
the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands
of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form
they please".
- Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1502 ] |
So, 17 April 2005 22:01 |
|
"Captain 20" <c20 [at] setyrtfj.77com> wrote in message
news:KBx8e.3232$Zr.938 [at] lakeread08...
> > > That's silly - all one has to do is look at the ratings.
> > >
> >
> > We've discussed at length why ratings on a network not universally
carried
> > by cable
> > providers might be incorrect.
>
> Yes, but as i explained, there's no reason to think the measurement error
is
> biased against Ent as opposed to for it, when compared to other shows. In
> other words, if nielsen says Ent has a 2.5 rating, Ent's "real" rating
might
> be 2.7 or 2.3. And its ranking vs. other shows is probably the same.
Yes, but you seem determine to always view any issue regarding Enterprise in
the negative. I choose to believe it's more positive.
>
> > So some of us believe it's silly to stick with
> > a ratings
> > platform that is outdated.
>
> But surely you know less about that than the owners of the show, who are
in
> the business and who have $$ riding on the outcome of those ratings?
>
Possibly. Possibly not.
>
> --
> "if federal judges have the final word over its meaning,
> the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands
> of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form
> they please".
>
> - Thomas Jefferson
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1515 ] |
Mo, 18 April 2005 03:38 |
|
> > Yes, but as i explained, there's no reason to think the measurement
error
> is
> > biased against Ent as opposed to for it, when compared to other shows.
In
> > other words, if nielsen says Ent has a 2.5 rating, Ent's "real" rating
> might
> > be 2.7 or 2.3. And its ranking vs. other shows is probably the same.
>
> Yes, but you seem determine to always view any issue regarding Enterprise
in
> the negative. I choose to believe it's more positive.
No, viewing it negatively would mean saying that Ent's "true" rating is
below what Nielsen says it is. I don't say that, because i don't know that.
All i know is that there's no way of telling whether the bias means Ent's
true rating is under- or over- what Nielsen says it is. Because that is not
knowable right now.
But you're right about yourself - you're viewing it postively, though on
what basis i don't know...
|
|
|
| Re: Transcript: Canadian Producer makes pitch to Paramount for Season Five of Enterprise [message #1546 ] |
Mo, 18 April 2005 16:34 |
|
"Captain 20" <c20 [at] setyrtfj.77com> wrote in message
news:1cE8e.3260$Zr.3129 [at] lakeread08...
> > > Yes, but as i explained, there's no reason to think the measurement
> error
> > is
> > > biased against Ent as opposed to for it, when compared to other shows.
> In
> > > other words, if nielsen says Ent has a 2.5 rating, Ent's "real" rating
> > might
> > > be 2.7 or 2.3. And its ranking vs. other shows is probably the same.
> >
> > Yes, but you seem determine to always view any issue regarding
Enterprise
> in
> > the negative. I choose to believe it's more positive.
>
> No, viewing it negatively would mean saying that Ent's "true" rating is
> below what Nielsen says it is. I don't say that, because i don't know
that.
> All i know is that there's no way of telling whether the bias means Ent's
> true rating is under- or over- what Nielsen says it is. Because that is
not
> knowable right now.
>
> But you're right about yourself - you're viewing it postively, though on
> what basis i don't know...
>
On the basis that I, as well as many others, saw a definite improvement in
season 4.
>
>
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Do Mai 24 16:37:02 CEST 2012
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,09211 Sekunden |
