Why Blue Bloods was canceled

[Grayfox54]

I've been a fan of Blue Bloods since the very beginning. Great show! Like many I was surprised that it got canceled this year after 14 very successful seasons. As it turns out, I wasn't the only one. The cast and crew were taken by surprise as well. They all wanted the show to continue and many tried hard to keep it going. So why did CBS cancel one of their most popular shows? Well, it seems that CBS decided that a show that promoted family values and supported police no longer fits in with their current "woke" thinking. So it had to go.  Screw SeeBS! 

https://www.outkick.com/culture/blue-bloods-aired-its-final-show-last-night-fans-emotional

https://www.outkick.com/culture/tom-selleck-rips-cbs-cancelling-blue-bloods-series

[Defender]

Figures.  I also loved that show. Hate to see then cancel it, and hate even more the reason why!

[monkeylizard]

Tom Selleck tried hard to get it to another network (even a cable network) but CBS owns it and wouldn't sell it. Not only did they pitch one of their best rated shows in the bin, they intentionally buried it.

[Grayfox54]

When a major network kills one of its most successful shows due to politics, it shows just how committed they are to the liberal agenda. Scary, ain't it? 

[RED333]

ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, have been banned from my tv for years. 

[Pain103]

I haven't watched it in a while, but 14 seasons is a heck of a run. I'm sure they made plenty of money during that time. 

[pop pop]

My wife likes this show. It is her favorite. She watches all the episodes and some of the old reruns on another network. It will be missed in our house. 

Shame on CBS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 01:27 PM by pop pop

[btq96r]

I'm guessing budget cuts came into play.  Networks are burning cash, and the talent density on Blue Bloods couldn't be cheap.  I'm also wondering if all the older, conservative tilt of the audience limited advertising revenue to offset the costs of the show.  Great ratings only matter if you can tell companies the people they want to buy their products are watching.

[River02]

51 minutes ago, btq96r said:

I'm guessing budget cuts came into play.  Networks are burning cash, and the talent density on Blue Bloods couldn't be cheap.  I'm also wondering if all the older, conservative tilt of the audience limited advertising revenue to offset the costs of the show.  Great ratings only matter if you can tell companies the people they want to buy their products are watching.

I'm sure that there is a good parcel of truth in the above post-- $$$ Talks and keeps the lights on...

[Grayfox54]

2 hours ago, btq96r said:

I'm guessing budget cuts came into play.  Networks are burning cash, and the talent density on Blue Bloods couldn't be cheap.  I'm also wondering if all the older, conservative tilt of the audience limited advertising revenue to offset the costs of the show.  Great ratings only matter if you can tell companies the people they want to buy their products are watching.

Blur Bloods was constant money maker for 14 years and was the #11 rated show, behind several big sports programs, at the time it was killed. 

If you read the articles, the entire cast and crew offered to take a 25% pay cut. Offer refused.

Selleck tried to buy the show and take it to another network. CBS wouldn't sell. CBS made up their minds that the show had to completely die and nothing was gonna change that. 

[btq96r]

10 hours ago, Grayfox54 said:

Blur Bloods was constant money maker for 14 years and was the #11 rated show, behind several big sports programs, at the time it was killed. 

If you read the articles, the entire cast and crew offered to take a 25% pay cut. Offer refused.

Selleck tried to buy the show and take it to another network. CBS wouldn't sell. CBS made up their minds that the show had to completely die and nothing was gonna change that. 

Ratings don't always equal money.  Like I said, if you can't sell the advertising to high payers, then you're not generating money.

The article didn't talk about how much that 25% pay cut came out to, did it?  For someone has experienced as Tom Selleck, and Donnie Wahlberg, I can see being up there on a per episode basis, even after a 25% cut.

And if I'm CBS, I'm not selling the show either.  The residuals from having Blue Bloods in syndication and/or on streaming platforms is a way for them to keep revenue coming in without having to actually pay to produce more.  14 years is a crazy large catalog of episodes people will probably be willing to watch for a long time to come.  At this point, CBS may have just wanted to make money on their 14 years of investment without putting any more into it due to diminishing returns.

[Omega]

4 hours ago, btq96r said:

Ratings don't always equal money.  Like I said, if you can't sell the advertising to high payers, then you're not generating money.

The article didn't talk about how much that 25% pay cut came out to, did it?  For someone has experienced as Tom Selleck, and Donnie Wahlberg, I can see being up there on a per episode basis, even after a 25% cut.

And if I'm CBS, I'm not selling the show either.  The residuals from having Blue Bloods in syndication and/or on streaming platforms is a way for them to keep revenue coming in without having to actually pay to produce more.  14 years is a crazy large catalog of episodes people will probably be willing to watch for a long time to come.  At this point, CBS may have just wanted to make money on their 14 years of investment without putting any more into it due to diminishing returns.

How does ratings not equal money?  Ratings are what gets advertisers to buy time to advertise their product.  Ratings equals people watching their commercials.  Now, the demographics of those ratings will surely play into it, but unless you are trying to sell Bud Light to a Blue Blood crowd, you will get as much return on your investment there than an equally rated show.