Re: Shares Of AMC Networks Plunge 35%

super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote:

On 2024-06-18 08:12:51 +0000, anim8rfsk said:

I think we can trace this directly to the announcement they will be airing
NAUTILUS

Shares Of AMC Networks Plunge 35% As Company Plans Debt Sale To Raise Cash

https://deadline.com/2024/06/amc-networks-stock-price-plunges-bond-offering-1235976225/

Ha! I think you can trace it back a few decades ago when they started
introducing commercials. First it was one commercial in the middle of a
movie, then they went full tilt with commercials every 10 minutes.

If TCM could survive 30 years without commercials there's no reason AMC
couldn't have done the same thing, but they went for the easy money I
guess.

Every time you post your opinion, it utterly ignores reality. TCM was an
imitation of AMC, even hiring away Robert Osborne. Shortly thereafter,
Ted Turner stopped licensing any movie he had control of to AMC that he
wanted instead to show on TCM. That forced AMC to completely change its
model. Also, the issue of whether a satellite channel has commercials
has to do with compensation from cable, whether it appears on a lower
tier or a higher tier. Comcast moved TCM into a higher tier long ago
when they demanded higher compensation and I'm sure other distributors
did as well.

Only a few big hits like The Sopranos and Mad Men probably kept their
heads above water this long. Now others with deep pockets like Amazon
and Apple have entered the fray.

Oh for fuck's sake. The Sopranos was on HBO. Mad Men was about men who
worked in advertising, so of all tv shows one might expect to have
commercials, that was the right series. In fact, you may recall it had
INTEGRATED commercials at times.