I’m not being sarcastic. I’m asking seriously why Fox keeps renewing this particular series year after year. It’s been on the air for twenty-five years now - no other series has ever gone past twenty years.
Is it just a low-cost series to produce so it justifies its place in the line-up even if it doesn’t get top ratings anymore? Does Fox get a cut of the merchandising and dvd sales? Is there a prestige thing about having the longest-running series on the air? Is Rupert Murdoch a big fan?
No underlying arc. Its animation so actors do not age. On screen at least. People are still watching it.
It’s a cash cow.
Also not being sarcastic but it’s still making them money, clearly. On a night that’s typically a ratings dead zone, why would they drop something that works for something that might not?
Man.
Why shouldn’t they? As long as people keep watching it—and I, for one, do. It’s long past its “golden age,” but it’s still recognizably the same show and worth watching more often than not, IMHO.
From here: Dotdash Meredith - America's Largest Digital & Print Publisher
It was pulling in 7.2 million viewers a few years ago (according to Wikipedia) and that was down from 13 million viewers a few years before that.
The studio also told the voice actors (and animators and a lot of other people associated with the show) that they had to take a drop in salary a few years ago or else the show would be cancelled. The actors salaries were cut to $300,000 per episode. Considering that they made $30,000 per episode when the show first started, they are still well paid. The show is also taking advantage of digital animation editing to reduce costs (again, according to Wikipedia).
So basically, the studio cut costs to keep it profitable and while the show only pulls in a fraction of the ratings that it used to, it’s still higher rated than a lot of shows.
Bart Gets an F from 1990 got 33.6 million viewers.
The April 28th episode, What to Expect When Bart’s Expecting, got 3.4 million viewers.
The decline in ratings is drastic, to say the least. OTOH, that episode was the 2nd highest rated show on Fox that night. (Family Guy was first.) Quite a bit of that is reflecting the decline in overall network viewership.
If you’re the 2nd highest rated show on a non-Fri/Sat night on a network with a big syndication following, you stay on the air. But even inertia has its limits.
The real surprise is that they can still get celebrity guest voices. At this point, isn’t appearing on the show far from cool?
I have at least a half dozen new episodes on my DVR that I might get around to watching someday.
Is it? The actors must make exorbitant salaries by now, and the ratings can’t be what they once were. I’m sure it earns its keep,but at some point a new show has to offer a higher return on investment.
Right?
I mean, isn’t that why other shows, even financially successful ones, get replaced? It can’t just be about actors physically ageing, or we’d still have Beavis and Butthead, King of the Hill, and Tiny Toon Adventures.
It’s very popular internationally, but if engineer_comp_geek is right it may be on its last legs.
I heard someone suggest they start ageing the characters in real time to mix it up a bit. It may renew interest.
Did you even read the thread?
If they had another show that would offer a higher return on investment they’d put it on. That doesn’t mean they’d take a show that is still profitable off the air. When enough shows are more profitable than the Simpsons, and there are no timeslots left, they’ll take it off the air, not until then. The exorbitant salaries, and the brief schedules of the voice actors guarantee that they’ll remain available and won’t quit the show for another series or movie. We don’t see Disney and Warner Bros. characters going away, we’re not likely to see the Simpsons go away either.
Yes, but engineer_comp_geek’s and ftg’s posts weren’t there when I started typing my post (on a tablet, so I was a bit slow).
That’s a great idea! Once Maggie ages a bit, they could add a new baby; that always boosts ratings! What’s Ted McGinley up to these days? Is he available for voice work?
Considering how many more channels and other forms of on-demand entertainment there are now to what was available in 1989, that doesn’t sound that bad.
The other networks numbers have fallen by about half from their 80’s peak, but Fox’s primetime viewer numbers actually haven’t really changed since 1989 (though its obviously shrunk as a fraction of the population). So I don’t think you can really blame the Simpson’s shrinking to a tenth of its former audience on declining network viewership.
Assuming that the network execs are behaving rationally (admittedly, a rather large assumption for Fox), a show will only get canceled when it’s either negative profit, or the least profitable show on the network and they have something lined up that they think will do better. The Simpsons may not be nearly as profitable as it once was, but it’s still far from the least profitable.
Ugh. Sorry dude.
My bad.
No biggie. Don’t worry about it.
Okay. Just send $1 to Sorry Dude…
Dammit! I tried to think of an appropriate Simpsons quote and couldn’t come up with one. That was a good one.