Is Nickelodeon deliberately getting new cartoons killed?

[aegisrawks]

It just ocurred to me now. Is Nickelodeon greenlighting cartoons and then cancelling them SO NO ONE else could get them? A Zaslav move at feels more legit because they at least "release the shows"? I know this is just a dumb thought but I want to know how you guys feel.

 

[Ace]

I don't think it's quite as malicious as killing things deliberately. Although giving Glitch Techs and Pinky Malinky to Netflix was pretty cold blooded of them. It's better than writing them off but still that's a pretty low bar.

On Nick you're competing against SpongeBob and old franchises that have been around for 7 years+ at the least many of them for multiple decades. How is anything new with an unfamiliar name meant to survive especially when hardly anyone is even watching cable?

 

[Light Lucario]

I can understand that logic since Nickelodeon is pretty infamous for not giving shows a chance to develop an audience. That has been the case for probably around twenty years at this rate. I don't think it would really make practical sense when making a show requires so much time, money and effort. Making a series and cancelling it just so that no one else can get them would be a pretty terrible way of dealing with the competition.

I think it's just a matter of Nickelodeon having a much higher standard of success after they struck gold with Spongebob. I don't think that they expect every new show to be necessarily that successful right off the bat, but I think that they want more immediate success instead of allowing shows to find their audience and their footing.

 

[Sam the Cartoonist]

Nickelodeon has even less of a reason to care about new cartoons now because most of them premiere on Paramount+, but it would be too costly for them to deliberately greenlight shows for the sake of canceling them. It's just poor corporate management more than anything.

 

[JMTV]

I wouldn't be surprised if they do. Nickelodeon has been known to do stuff like this. This is nothing new.

As much I hate the Nicktoons Death Treament, at least Nick was able to showcase their shows SOMEWHERE. Hell, at least we had Paramount Plus and Netflix. They're still bad, but Nick is like the lesser of the two evils.

 

[LinusFan303]

No, it does cost money to pick up a series they wouldn't buy something just to burn it. (And Zaslav at WB isn't buying stuff to burn it, they were burning stuff the previous regime had bought)

Nickelodeon is a very heavy focus testing network and especially is interesting in making sure boys 6-11 to watch, again marketing for ads, because viewers are the product. I don't even believe in a "Spongebob Standard" It's Pony had great season 1 ratings at least for the data seen, and so did Ollie's Pack. Something makes me feel that previous wasn't hitting marks with the demo they wanted and they had ordered two seasons so they walked away. Then again after that, they seemed to have let shows end on main Nick (read: The Casagrandes and Middlemost Post)

Alvinnn!!! and the Chipmunks, a show not made by them, did well for them and that's why it still ran for so long, kind of under the radar. It's ratings were on par with the Loud House. It also must have been doing well with key demos as well.

Mentioning the two shows on Netflix from them, those from the era Viacom didn't have a streaming service and wisely made a deal with the #1 streamer , then Viacom and CBS remerge (grr) and CBS had a (not real) streaming service and decided to use that, they couldn't break contracts with Netflix so corporate let those shows wither because of that reason. The Loud House movie didn't even get Nick promos while the live-action one did because why? The latter was going to be also on co-owned Paramount Plus, they didn't want to mention Netflix anymore. Though I think that has thawed at least in terms of rights because licensing is money.

Also, Spongebob is on a totally different level of show. It has tons or merch, high recognition it makes money by itself , they aren't ending shows because they expect Spongebob level 2 , then they wouldn't even try they could live off one show. Spongebob doesn't even have to get super high ratings anymore, it's still making money in some form. Would they like other shows to be like that? Sure, but I don't think they are putting heavy pressure like that to force it. Other shows have to make at least some money to fund it though and if it's not doing that , then sure.

I'm not going to say everyone who created something for them was treated well, but I think the business has a sense of coldness to it, in general, sadly. Disney told 700 people this year they are expendable, Paramount told people this year they are expendable, on and on.


But I don't think they are going around buying shows they have to make and pay for , especially for a company that's in not fun finance zone, just to own the stuff that if it doesn't work out they might not be able to do much with after the fact.