DYNASTY's time-slot and production costs

[Michael Torrance]

OK but then why this does not apply to season 9 ? And to a lesser extend to "The Colbys" ?

Because it is called double standards.

 

[Gabriel Maxwell]

OK, but then why this does not apply to season 9? And to a lesser extent to "The Colbys" ?

Obviously, time slot can make a difference.

Because it is called double standards.

What double standards? I'm reading what I posted above and I can't see where I said the timeslot doesn't make any difference. What I said was that the move to 10pm was a logical scheduling decision by ABC given the show's precipitous fall in 85-87 and the moving of Hotel; and that a timeslot is among the many excuses used by fans to explain why their show is not working (not working at all or not working anymore). By not working I mean: constantly losing eyeballs.

Of course there will be a difference between what a show does in two different timeslots, especially if they're on different days. The best example is The Colbys which instantly jumped in the ratings when it aired behind Dynasty on those few rare occasions (most notably the penultimate episode of season 2). Also, 'Broken Krystle' premiered to 11.6 million households, down from the aforementioned 14.3 million for 'Colorado Roulette'.

It was expected that the show would drop when it faced stiff competition on Thursday. But if a show has life in it, it should be able to hold whatever audience it is able to capture in that particular timeslot (with some minor fluctuations, of course) or post moderate drops (all shows ultimately decline).

Dynasty wasn't able to hold (let alone grow) its audience anymore in any of the 3 timeslots it aired in its latter years (occasional short-lived bumps notwithstanding). In fact, it was a plummeting show. So, why would you keep it at 9pm Wednesdays or squander a hot strong lead-in on it?

By the end of 1988, Dynasty was on its last legs. Most people here will say it had an exquisite final season and I won't argue with that. But the audiences had been deserting it in droves ever since the godawful 'Aftermath' and ultimately no one, including David Paulsen, could stop that.

 

[Tony]

Surprisingly both Terri Garber and Linda Evans said that they didn’t know Season 9 would be their last season, and if they did, they would have stayed on until the end.

Which indicates that Dynasty was doing well enough in the Wednesday 10pm slot to stay on the air, as Gabriel indicates.

It was only when the show moved to Thursday that the cast began to panic, as they knew the terrible slot had sealed the fate of The Colbys.

I’d be interested to know exactly when in the summer of 1988 was the decision made to move Dynasty to Thursdays.

 

[Michael Torrance]

Surprisingly both Terri Garber and Linda Evans said that they didn’t know Season 9 would be their last season, and if they did, they would have stayed on until the end.

Which indicates that Dynasty was doing well enough in the Wednesday 10pm slot to stay on the air, as Gabriel indicates.

It was only when the show moved to Thursday that the cast began to panic, as they knew the terrible slot had sealed the fate of The Colbys.

I’d be interested to know exactly when in the summer of 1988 was the decision made to move Dynasty to Thursdays.

DYNASTY was initially not ordered for the full 22 episodes, the first time this had happened since 1981. Linda Evans had already told the show that she wanted out, and Paulsen was happy to oblige--given her salary, she would NOT have stayed on except in the same way Collins was, on and off, and Evans wanted to free her schedule so I don't see her having stayed for such a timetable.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I tend to agree with Gabriel in this thread as the evidence is in the material.

Much of the damage to Dynasty’s credibility was done in seasons 6 and 7, because of the Moldavia resolution, the two krystles, the new fake Fallon followed by fake Amanda, the slow repetition of 6A and ponderous too nice 7b.

Despite upticks in 6B and the middle and latter half of 7, it wasn’t enough to bring back the lost audience as the damage had been done.

Season 8 was shorter with more cohesion so the core audience stabilised at 10pm but with the Season 9 Thursday time slot it was the death rattle as ABC were determined to kill the show.

Of course.

 

[Tony]

DYNASTY was initially not ordered for the full 22 episodes, the first time this had happened since 1981. Linda Evans had already told the show that she wanted out, and Paulsen was happy to oblige--given her salary, she would NOT have stayed on except in the same way Collins was, on and off, and Evans wanted to free her schedule so I don't see her having stayed for such a timetable.

She says in a tv interview she would have stayed until the end if she had known. I’ll find the link and post it.

 

[Michael Torrance]

She says in a tv interview she would have stayed until the end if she had known. I’ll find the link and post it.

I am not doubting you that she said it. I just think it was an after the fact statement to please the fans. The reduced episode order was quite a sign.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

What double standards? I'm reading what I posted above and I can't see where I said the timeslot doesn't make any difference. What I said was that the move to 10pm was a logical scheduling decision by ABC given the show's precipitous fall in 85-87 and the moving of Hotel; and that a timeslot is among the many excuses used by fans to explain why their show is not working (not working at all or not working anymore). By not working I mean: constantly losing eyeballs.

Of course there will be a difference between what a show does in two different timeslots, especially if they're on different days. The best example is The Colbys which instantly jumped in the ratings when it aired behind Dynasty on those few rare occasions (most notably the penultimate episode of season 2). Also, 'Broken Krystle' premiered to 11.6 million households, down from the aforementioned 14.3 million for 'Colorado Roulette'.

It was expected that the show would drop when it faced stiff competition on Thursday. But if a show has life in it, it should be able to hold whatever audience it is able to capture in that particular timeslot (with some minor fluctuations, of course) or post moderate drops (all shows ultimately decline).

Dynasty wasn't able to hold (let alone grow) its audience anymore in any of the 3 timeslots it aired in its latter years (occasional short-lived bumps notwithstanding). In fact, it was a plummeting show. So, why would you keep it at 9pm Wednesdays or squander a hot strong lead-in on it?

By the end of 1988, Dynasty was on its last legs. Most people here will say it had an exquisite final season and I won't argue with that. But the audiences had been deserting it in droves ever since the godawful 'Aftermath' and ultimately no one, including David Paulsen, could stop that.

Actually, I, for one, agreed with 98% of what you said. But a bad time slot sometimes makes a difference, especially when most of the audience is already leaving. Obviously.

 

[colbyco]

The timeslot was important ...
It´s one thing to air a hot new show which all the press and people are crazy for on 10pm or to move an aged show which critics say "it´s over for them " from 9 to 10.

but from the eyes of ABC they wanted to get rid off Dynasty and Spelling so they put "Hooperman" which was a fresh show with potential on 9pm ....
It´s like the ratings weren´t bad enough to cancel it so ABC moved it to Thursday ....

 

[Gabriel Maxwell]

I’d be interested to know exactly when in the summer of 1988 was the decision made to move Dynasty to Thursdays.

The spring of 1988. The fall schedules are always announced in May at the Upfronts in New York (big presentation for advertisers) and despite the writers' strike of 1988 (which cut the 87/88 season a little and more significantly delayed the start of the 88/89 season) the 1988 schedule announcement was no exception.

Here is an article from The Los Angeles Times dated May 24, 1988 detailing the just-announced fall 1988 schedule and Dynasty is indeed listed under Thursday (for those in the EU you can use a US proxy site to view the content):

http://articles.latimes.com/1988-05-24/entertainment/ca-3267_1_abc-cancels-columbo

 

[colbyco]

(for those in the EU you can use a US proxy site to view the content):

http://articles.latimes.com/1988-05-24/entertainment/ca-3267_1_abc-cancels-columbo

- What´s that?

 

[Gabriel Maxwell]

- What´s that?

Well, for example, see if this link works for you:

http://webproxy.to/browse.php/fjOZl...h/dkeGvLtP/OTbwe6dR/zqbwYNHU/i5pn/b5/fnorefer

Either way, whenever you can't load a page from the US because of these new EU rules, just copy the original link into a proxy site like this one:

http://webproxy.to/

and after you click 'GO' it will take you to your desired US webpage as if you were accessing it from the US and you'll be able to see it.

 

[Luke Fuller]

It was at #24 because it dipped in the middle, but
Shadow Play (episode 28) was at 14th (17.6)
The Affair (episode 27) was at 14th (16.8)
The Confession (episode 26) was at 13th (16.9)

In the middle of the Sarah Curtis travesty, it was down to 40th (13.7) with "The Surgery" (episode 20) but it was gaining strength again once that was over.

I am afraid that you are wrong. Dynasty was falling from late January (after two "Singapoure episodes") to May 1987 with small exceptions of The Dress and The Sublet episodes. What about relatively satisfactory rakings of the last three episodes, be careful, bcs they were aired after 1986/87 season had ended, it means with possible lower competition. Rakings can be misleading, ratings are more accurate. The decision of ABC to move Dynasty into a new timeslot for 1987/88 season is understandable.

episode 7.16 - rating 18.9 (return from Singapoure, No. 16)
episode 7.17 - rating 18.2 (Krystina had health problems for the first time, No. 20)
episode 7.18 - rating 17.8
episode 7.19 - rating 16.9 (Sarah Curtis for the first time)
episode 7.20 - rating 13.7 (the lowest raking of the season as No. 40)
episode 7.21 - rating 16.5
episode 7.22 - rating 16.8
episode 7.23 - rating 18.6 (The Dress episode, back in TOP 20 as No. 16 or 17)
episode 7.24 - rating 16.3
episode 7.25 - rating 17.4 (looking for kidnapped Krystina, back in TOP 20, probably as No. 16)
OFFICIAL END OF SEASON 1986/87
episode 7.26 - rating 16.9
episode 7.27 - rating 16.8 (Sarah Curtis for the last time)
episode 7.28 - rating 17.6

 

[Alexis]

Sarah Curtis killed DYNASTY!!! I knew it!!!

 

[GillesDenver]

The decision of ABC to move Dynasty into a new timeslot for 1987/88 season is understandable.

But, again, "Magnum P.I." did worst the same season and yet it was still broadcasted in the same timeslot the next season.

 

[Alexis]

But, again, "Magnum P.I." did worst the same season and yet it was still broadcasted in the same timeslot the next season.

And no Sarah Curtis on Magnum P.I. ha! More proof!

 

[Luke Fuller]

But, again, "Magnum P.I." did worst the same season and yet it was still broadcasted in the same timeslot the next season.

Well, Magnum P. I. was aired by CBS, not ABC. Management of CBS had possibly a different marketing strategy.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Sorry, I'm a little confused, but what's the big deal about 9pm or 10pm? It's an hour earlier or later. DALLAS started at 10 o'clock and we never thought "hm, that's strange".

 

[Michael Torrance]

I am afraid that you are wrong. Dynasty was falling from late January (after two "Singapoure episodes") to May 1987 with small exceptions of The Dress and The Sublet episodes. What about relatively satisfactory rakings of the last three episodes, be careful, bcs they were aired after 1986/87 season had ended, it means with possible lower competition.
OFFICIAL END OF SEASON 1986/87
episode 7.26 - rating 16.9
episode 7.27 - rating 16.8 (Sarah Curtis for the last time)
episode 7.28 - rating 17.6

Well, I don't know where you get your information about the season, but here is when the episodes aired
The Confession: April 22,
The Affair: April 29
Shadow Play: May 6

The season actually ended in May--it still does.

 

[Alexis]

Sorry, I'm a little confused, but what's the big deal about 9pm or 10pm? It's an hour earlier or later. DALLAS started at 10 o'clock and we never thought "hm, that's strange".

I guess it would depend what the competition was on other networks at 10.

 

[Michael Torrance]

I guess it would depend what the competition was on other networks at 10.

The competition counts, but so does habit. Different populations watch TV at different times--at least that was the philosophy in the era of the big networks in the 80s. I mean, for decades, and certainly then, networks built their schedules in the US based on the lead-in principle, that one show leads into another and although I know people say "but they can just use the remote," a huge number of viewers does get siphoned from one program to the next. That is why having Dynasty after a top-20 show, as @GillesDenver mentioned, at 10 p.m. in 1982 is not the same as having it at 10 p.m. after weak sitcoms like "Hooperman" and "Slap Maxwell."
Obviously, if a show is strong, it will survive anything, but that was not Dynasty's state then, which nobody has denied. It was a weak show creatively, made even weaker by the shifting time slot--or at least that is what it seems like to those of us who think time slot is a factor, and don't claim "timeslot change is one of the most common fan excuses" only to backtrack when somebody brings up The Colbys and season 9. Shows don't air in a vacuum.