Re: PaxNet

[Douglas Broda <dougbroda@mindspring.com>]

Oh, I agree there's a market for such programming. The questions, I think, are:

Can a network with no first-run programming draw enough viewers to sustain this many affiliates? It's never been done before on an over-the-air network level. On the one hand, the cost is relatively low (I believe most of the PaxNet stations will have very limited staffing); the stations were surviving carrying shows with
lower viewership before than this will have; and the paid programming at night will provide some cash flow. On the other hand, PaxNet's not going to get much over-the-air viewership, since with a few exceptions (like channel 31 in New York City), their stations have poor coverage. Instead, most viewers will get them via cable
courtesy of must-carry, and on cable they have a "competitor" in the Family Channel that has had a similar philosophy. (Though with their sale, whether they will maintain an image that appears similar to the target audience is open to debate.)

So I certainly don't think, in light of those circumstances, that they are a guaranteed failure as some do. I do think they'll have to stay lean on the expense side to have a shot. I think they are going to have to maintain that paid programming income for some time to gain a foothold. Since the majority of PaxNet stations are
now carrying programs that are hardly seen by many (largely infomercials in many cases, plus Worship in some cases), they'll have to get out the word, and so far they haven't made much of a splash to the general public, which is a concern marketing-wise with the launch so close. But they could make it. They don't need to be a
huge ratings success to make it -- I think that's the wrong question. The right one is the bottom line, and the ratings books don't decide that one anymore alone.

Wayne Carter wrote:

> >>Bud Paxson made it a point to repeatedly state how PaxNet will be a
> >>family network,unlike the other networks.I don't expect them to be a huge
> >>ratings success,IMHO,unless they venture into original first run
> >>programming.Even so,with so much out there on TV,can they survive???Any
> >>opinions?
> >
> >
> >Don't know about his wallet, but running that network is gonna be
> >expensive.... I give it about 6 months to a year.
> >
> >Anyone wanna take odds???
> >
> >-Rick Ganley
>
>         Give me a choice.......
>
>         Buffy or Little House....
>         NYPD or Touched....
>
>         I'll watch it. And I would want my children to be there too.....why?
>
>         Because its not the average trash!
>         Now it is true that I may be a minority.... one who doesn't appreciate mutilated bodies and gore, bad language and even worse manners... I'll gladly be a part of that minority! And I'm raising a family that respects others, treats them with dignity, has manners, opens doors for others, doesn't use foul language....
>         And according to the most recent polls, there are about 70 million of us in this country. I think that programming to appeal to decency and morals makes a ton of sense, and I see a lot of others with that exact same thought.
>
>         In addition, the Paxson folks sell their evenings to a brokered show, "The Worship Channel", which pays very nicely and helps to keep cash flow on target.
>
>         I'll take odds..... if they show up on my system, my family will be tuned in...... a lot!
>
> **************************************************************
> Wayne Carter                            wcarter@mva.net
>                 http://www.jlight.com/
> **************************************************************
> "No people here to look stupid for......Just George!"
>                         - George of Jungle



- --
Douglas J. Broda
Broda and Burnett
Attorneys at Law
80 Ferry Street
Troy, New York 12180
(518) 272-0580
dougbroda@mindspring.com

------------------------------