Who's responsible for the end of Stargate?

[shavedape]

That's all I meant by choosing them. In a very simple cause and effect situation, by not watching, the viewership at large are responsible.

How can you be blind to the contradiction of the bolded statement?

If there are no viewers there is no viewership to blame. The term "viewership" defines a group of people who view something. If people are not watching they are not part of a viewership.

Again, WHO is the group of people that you believe are REQUIRED to watch SGU? Define this "viewership" you keep referring to please.

 

[Graybrew1]

Even when I was a more Gung and Ho fan of SGU. I never blamed the fans. That is BS. If I don't like what your cooking in a restuarant, I am going to leave. Who's fault is it? It is the chef's , plain and simple. Customer is always right.

 

[Tropicana]

Mod hat on

As a reminder folks, remain calm - do not get all heated up because one person said this and another said that. Keep it cool.

 

[Graybrew1]

As a reminder folks, remain calm - do not get all heated up because one person said this and another said that. Keep it cool.

Sorry, did not mean to get heated. Just wanted to make the point.

 

[Tropicana]

Even when I was a more Gung and Ho fan of SGU. I never blamed the fans. That is BS. If I don't like what your cooking in a restuarant, I am going to leave. Who's fault is it? It is the chef's , plain and simple. Customer is always right. Blaming the fans is a cop out.

Exactly.

The Chef can claim that his ex-customers are uneducated crackheads, but in order to survive and thrive, he has to cook what his local customers like eating. If he is in the middle of nowhere, and he makes sushi and all his potential customers prefer eating meat and steaks and fries, then obviously, he has to cook meat and steaks and fries, there is no point making sushi if no one in the local area wants them.

Sure sushi maybe a hit in the city but if you're in the middle of nowhere, then yeah, you have to cater to what the locals want. It's called exploiting your local market. How else are you going to pay your bills?

 

[Tropicana]

Sorry, did not mean to get heated. Just wanted to make the point.

It was a general bulletin, it wasn't targetted at anyone specific, your comment was fine.

 

[shavedape]

Sorry, did not mean to get heated. Just wanted to make the point.

Don't think he meant you GB.

 

[Graybrew1]

Don't think he meant you GB.

Well, I have been sticking my foot in it so much lately, I was not sure.

 

[stclare]

That's all I meant by choosing them. In a very simple cause and effect situation, by not watching, the viewership at large are responsible. Of course its not as simple but there is an irony there that ultimately the most powerful group isn't united (how could they be after all) and as a result they all suffer when various shows fail. But I think you got it right as 'passively' responsible.

And yes the producers were not great at PR during the whole debacle but ultimately I believe Syfy and MGM made the money decisions. Stargate Universe would not have been the death knell of the franchise had it not been thrown out there at an inappropriate time and expected to replace the income of another show. That decision, not the creation of Universe, is what I think is to blame.

I disagree. Lack of viewers is a symptom of the problem, and the problem being the show itself.

Appropriate time? are you forgetting it lost most of its viewers in the friday slot? where SGA/SG1 did considerably better even in there latter years.

Universe had been created at least 2 years before sga was cancelled, we know this as BW had already mentioned it. I ask you if BW & RCC had not already begun work on it and presented that idea and vision to MGM what would have happened? They had already left sga to mallozi there interest was solely in sgu.

IMO of course.

 

[Lilith]

That's all I meant by choosing them. In a very simple cause and effect situation, by not watching, the viewership at large are responsible. Of course its not as simple but there is an irony there that ultimately the most powerful group isn't united (how could they be after all) and as a result they all suffer when various shows fail. But I think you got it right as 'passively' responsible.

And yes the producers were not great at PR during the whole debacle but ultimately I believe Syfy and MGM made the money decisions. Stargate Universe would not have been the death knell of the franchise had it not been thrown out there at an inappropriate time and expected to replace the income of another show. That decision, not the creation of Universe, is what I think is to blame.

Yoshi, what viewership at large are you speaking of? I can't believe this but I agree with shaveape. I never was a fan of SGU dispite being a fan of the previous shows. SGu was a new show made not in the vein of previous Stargate. Viewership began at zero. The premiere attracted some fans of the previous shows skewing the numbers but viewers that were not obligated to continue watching. Viewership held at or around 1 million. It lived (Old Viewer's didn't ask for it) and died ( New viewers didn't get that into it) on it's own.

 

[Overmind One]

Almost...

Exactly.

The Chef can claim that his ex-customers are uneducated crackheads, but in order to survive and thrive, he has to cook what his local customers like eating. If he is in the middle of nowhere, and he makes sushi and all his potential customers prefer eating meat and steaks and fries, then obviously, he has to cook meat and steaks and fries, there is no point making sushi if no one in the local area wants them.

Sure sushi maybe a hit in the city but if you're in the middle of nowhere, then yeah, you have to cater to what the locals want. It's called exploiting your local market. How else are you going to pay your bills?

In THIS case, the Chef not only wanted to change his menu from meat and steak and fries to sushi AND told the steak lovers to get the hell out of the restaurant if they didnt like it. This phrase which was being thrown in our faces is more than half the reason I joined the SGU Haters:

"If you dont like it, then dont watch it!"

And that is exactly what many fans did.

 

[Graybrew1]

In THIS case, the Chef not only wanted to change his menu from meat and steak and fries to sushi AND told the steak lovers to get the hell out of the restaurant if they didnt like it. This phrase which was being thrown in our faces is more than half the reason I joined the SGU Haters:

"If you dont like it, then dont watch it!"

And that is exactly what many fans did.

That is too funny! I used to work in the resturant business years ago, and I can just picture that poo that would hit the fan if a chef ever actually did that!
Green for you if I can.

I love where you guys went with my analogy.

 

[UxmalTrekker]

Without a doubt, those responsible are the leaders of the creative team, the PTB.

To put it simply, if they would have made a product that the market wanted, then all of the surrounding peripheral problems would have gone away. Or at the very least those problems would have been somewhat mitigated so as not to be so completely overwhelming.

Then, add to the mostly negative public reception of the product the number of statements issued/written by the producers that were essentially qualitative generalizations; generalizations which painted anyone that didn’t like said new product as dysfunctional or in some way deficient (afraid of change, wanted only SG1/SGA clone, wanted only pew-pew, “basement dwellers” that were not intelligent enough to understand the concept, etc.); and a bad situation is turned into an impossibly unsalvageable one. If they would have been professionally open to criticism and had even softly addressed some of the major issues without sarcasm, malice, blackmail and blame, then some of the fans would have been much more willing to stay on board. Then subsequently, the level of intolerance for the program and for the producers would have been nowhere near as extreme as it ended up being (it wouldn’t have disappeared – but goodwill can go a long way). Would they have kept enough people to make it work, we’ll never know. It’s a shame that they didn’t at least attempt to cultivate the potential audience.

Although, I firmly believe that the blame rests upon their shoulders, some thoughts of franchise fatigue and disgruntled SGA fans undoubtedly come to play at the very front of the equation as well. However, a product perceived as being ‘good’ by the viewing audience would have somewhat mitigated these things, just like it would have everything else. As would some real ownership and answers for the cancellation of SGA, which is, once again, on the shoulders of the producers.

@Yoshi
Hey, I’m not trying to pick a fight with you, but could you expound on why you feel the blame rests on the shoulders of the viewers. I want to understand your perspective, but I don’t see anything that logically points to the viewers. It’s like a setup of dominoes, and the producers are always at front of the row toppling everything else.

 

[Lilith]

I liked all the shows. I was not happy about losing SGA either.

I am extremly unhappy with the way SGU is turning out. I had "lower expectations" than most for SG. Just desperate to have it in any form. But it feels like the show was only half ready. I think the premise could have been amazing. I have yet to see what half the darn ship has to offer and not much more about the ancients.

This could have been a great show.

They could have used the stargates every week as a main part of the show. They could have met countless aliens with lots of nifty cool gadgets. They could have delved into the what the ancients were really like, what they were thinking and again a lot more nifty gadgets. They could have been countless battles and victories with lots of well written plotlines and twists. They could have...They could have....They could have. Well that was the problem with the show. They could have. But they did not. I still consider it a part of SG, but the worst of the bunch for sure. I am cringing to how they are going to leave this show. I predict all the boards will be on fire, with lots of angry people.

You see I had all those same questions about SGA. They could have done more or done it better. They could have changed the direction of SGA and I still would have watched. They could have gone all dark and edgy and I would have been there every Friday night. They also could have changed the night to Tuesday and I would have migrated there with them. This is what annoys me. Stargate is a product until it isn't a product. The palette gets skewed with ego, fanship, or ratings that at the end of the day has nothing to do with the product.

 

[Graybrew1]

You see I had all those same questions about SGA. They could have done more or done it better. They could have changed the direction of SGA and I still would have watched. They could have gone all dark and edgy and I would have been there every Friday night. They also could have changed the night to Tuesday and I would have migrated there with them. This is what annoys me. Stargate is a product until it isn't a product. The palette gets skewed with ego, fanship, or ratings that at the end of the day has nothing to do with the product.

Could you go into more detail on where this train of thought is going. It is a little confusing to me the way I am reading it. I think you are saying if you don't like the show it nullifies the actual show. Is that what you meant?

 

[shavedape]

In THIS case, the Chef not only wanted to change his menu from meat and steak and fries to sushi AND told the steak lovers to get the hell out of the restaurant if they didnt like it. This phrase which was being thrown in our faces is more than half the reason I joined the SGU Haters:

"If you dont like it, then dont watch it!"

And that is exactly what many fans did.

"Fortunately for this restaurant the steak and fries crowd aren't necessary for success."

Sound familiar?

 

[shavedape]

I can't believe this but I agree with shaveape.

Don't fight it Lilith, resistance is oh so futile.

Not sure why you are so surprised to find yourself agreeing with me, but I'll take what I can get.

And just to show that I'm not such a bad guy I'll give you some green.

 

[Tropicana]

"Fortunately for this restaurant the steak and fries crowd aren't necessary for success."

Sound familiar?

Oh if Gordon Ramsey was there, he will beg to differ, lol.

 

[Lilith]

Could you go into more detail on where this train of thought is going. It is a little confusing to me the way I am reading it. I think you are saying if you don't like the show it nullifies the actual show. Is that what you meant?

No, not at all. TBTB wanted the critical acclaim that BSG got to stroke their ego's, they assumed that the old audience would watch SGU simply because it had Stargate in the title referencing the fans. The fanship is a living entity that responds to stimuli either negatively or positively which is reflected in viewership or ratings. The palatte referrs to tbtp artistic freedom or skill that they inject into the product or series. There over inflated ego's was given full reign knowning that they could jeopardized several million in viewers doesn't seem to have fiqured into their equation of success until it was too late.

 

[Red Mage]

First and foremost, the majority of the blame is on the writers and producers. They designed all the aspects of the show so its failure is ultimately their fault. However, MGM and Syfy also have a bit of blame in the series demise. These companies both greenlight the writers to produce SGU despite the fact its concept was significantly different from previous incarnations of Stargate. It was a calculated risk and it is understandable why MGM and Syfy took a chance since these writers were successful in the past. Unfortunately, MGM and Syfy lost that bet. Also, despite criticism of season 1 MGM and Syfy failed to step in an force the writers to make major changes to SGU for Season.