TV Exclusivity the wrong way around?

[misfit103]

I noticed that if you have an exclusive tv deal, you can't expand a show to other areas. Shouldn't it be that that network has the exclusive rights to it's area for that show or your promotion, and you have exclusive rights to that network? You should still be able to expand your shows somehow.

[Sigilistic]

[QUOTE=misfit103;446535]I noticed that if you have an exclusive tv deal, you can't expand a show to other areas. Shouldn't it be that that network has the exclusive rights to it's area for that show or your promotion, and you have exclusive rights to that network? You should still be able to expand your shows somehow.[/QUOTE] Then how would it be exclusive?

[rufas2000]

It could go both ways. Sometimes the network locks you in and you can only broadcast the show on there, sometimes the fed gets a deal with a network where the network can only show that fed. The WWF did that in the mid 80s, primarily the USA Network. The WWF did not get that deal with WTBS (actually Turner started broadcasting Mid south wrestling and a revived Georgia promotion) and drug their feet on giving TBS an exclusive show so the WWF cut bait and sold the time to Jim Crockett Promotions. They in turn got an exclusive so that only their programs were shown on TBS, bye bye WWF, Georgia territory* and Mid South territory. The four major shows now (Raw, Smackdown, ECW, Impact) are exclusive to the station they are on but the WWE for sure can go out and start new shows on other networks. Not sure if TNA can do the same. * The Georgia territory was either bought out or already ran by Jim Crockett Promotions. The WWF ended their relationship badly with WTBS, the Mid South show was the one primarily affected as the reason the show was taken off WTBS was because of the exclusive deal they had with JCP.

[HHUK]

In my understanding, exclusivity should be by region and not globally. If a show was exclusively on ABC in USA, there's a good chance it would be shown on E4 or another channel in the UK. I thought the exclusivity was to stop you expanding you shows to smaller networks in the same region which may tempt viewers away from bigger networks.

[D-Lyrium]

If that were true, what would be the point in exclusivity? From a gameplay point of view? How many times have you got a show on an American network, and then expanded the same show to be shown on.. another American network? That would be pointless in TEW, ergo, nobody would do it, ergo, exclusivity would be a pointless fluff feature. Exclusivity is supposed to be global, because it's supposed to be a choice. Do you accept this deal, getting a good slot on a good network but restricting yourself to only being able to broadcast TV shows in one area... or do you go for a deal that's not so great, but allows you to be seen internationally?

[TheJoshRollins]

[QUOTE=D-Lyrium;446638]If that were true, what would be the point in exclusivity? From a gameplay point of view? How many times have you got a show on an American network, and then expanded the same show to be shown on.. another American network? That would be pointless in TEW, ergo, nobody would do it, ergo, exclusivity would be a pointless fluff feature. Exclusivity is supposed to be global, because it's supposed to be a choice. Do you accept this deal, getting a good slot on a good network but restricting yourself to only being able to broadcast TV shows in one area... or do you go for a deal that's not so great, but allows you to be seen internationally?[/QUOTE] One, kudos to you, D, for using the term ergo. That's awesome. Two, no station in America is going to want your show if they cover the Southwest and your show is already on a station that covers the Southwest. They won't be guaranteed any ratings that way. So, it goes to D's last comment in his post. Do you stick with a great deal that only allows you to have that one deal, or do you get a not-so-great deal that allows you to get more not-so-great deals? It's why the game is a STRATEGY game.

[D-Lyrium]

What can I say? I'm an old-fashioned bastard. I use words like 'methinks' and 'perchance' too and occasionally, where appropriate, an apostrophe. Yes, even in text messages. :(

[TheJoshRollins]

A man after my own heart. You are like a grammatical brother to me, sir.

[fatallylost]

[QUOTE=D-Lyrium;446654]What can I say? I'm an old-fashioned bastard. I use words like 'methinks' and 'perchance' too and occasionally, where appropriate, an apostrophe. Yes, even in text messages. :([/QUOTE] Thank the lord I'm not the only one who punctuates text messages!

[misfit103]

Eh, I was thinking more along the lines of real life than strategy, but I don't think about the game being geared towards the C-Verse either.

[Greg McNeish]

This is actually the biggest reason that this is the only message board that I frequent. I get rather put off by "txt tlk", or whatever they call it, these days. We're just so grammarlicious.

[rufas2000]

[QUOTE]I was thinking more along the lines of real life than strategy[/QUOTE] I focused my response on the real life side. However Adam has said (and I agree) that when real life conflicts with what's best for the game (to make it more fun primarily) the game wins.

[misfit103]

I get it, I just didn't consider that. I was thinking along the lines of TNA, where Spike has rights to ALL TNA programming, but only in North America.

[TheJoshRollins]

[QUOTE=Greg McNeish;446669]This is actually the biggest reason that this is the only message board that I frequent. I get rather put off by "txt tlk", or whatever they call it, these days. We're just so grammarlicious.[/QUOTE] Txtin is aw3sum dogg... Note: I feel like I lost 5 IQ points after posting that.

[rufas2000]

[QUOTE]I get it, I just didn't consider that. I was thinking along the lines of TNA, where Spike has rights to ALL TNA programming, but only in North America.[/QUOTE] I thought that was the case but wasn't sure. I was going to use it as an example.

[T-Jay]

I think it should be more like: If you sign with a company in say New England that wants to have an exclusive contract, that should only apply to the USA not to the rest of the world. eg. WWE has an exclusive contract for the US, yet another contract with a canadian, UK, Australian etc companies. Also (not sure if this has changed) having other countries tv companies say you have too many shows on is ridiculous. It could only apply for that particular country... not globally. If you can only get one company in the US to sign you up and you have similar popularity elsewhere in the world then another company should sign you based on that fact... not because of your popularity anywhere else. Hope this made something resembling sense.....

[HHUK]

Having global exclusivity is useless unless the stations make you offers similar to random events without you having to approach them first. I've not had any TV stations demand exclusivity in the negotiations either. Besides, I can't see why anyone would want to limit themselves.

[bshankly]

i wanted a B show so i go give the tv company exclusivity. I was hoping that that meant that all my shows for that country would be exclusive to that company. I was wrong and can't expand outside the US until my deal is over.