Pop Culture Reunion: Melrose Place

Back in October 2012, Entertainment Weekly ("EW"), a staple of Hollywood reporting (whether it's legitimate news or not) ran a "reunion" issue.  Apparently, it was the magazine's third-annual reunion issue.  But many of the reunions in the magazine were for shows that haven't even been off the airwaves for a decade, so I wasn't too impressed, but it was free reading in the waiting room, so I didn't complain.

Of course, EW is an actual, printed magazine, so when I browsed that particular issue at the doctors' office while waiting to have my eyes examined, I wondered exactly what the online content for that issue might contain.

EW did not disappoint on that front.

Below is a video clip from EW on a cast reunion for what was arguably one of Aaron Spelling's last big TV hits: "Melrose Place" (the show aired on the Fox television network).  I'm aware this show actually aired in the early 1990s, but it's relevant for the audience this show targeted: Gen Xers.  "Melrose Place" was designed to be a bit more mature than Mr. Spelling's popular "Beverly Hills 90210" which ran at the same time, which was all about high school kids, not young adults, but in reality, it was a soap opera, not really a sitcom or a drama.  "Melrose Place" aimed for young adults who were just starting out.  Needless to say, it did well among Gen Xers, many of whom had already finished or had just finished college themselves.

A lot of the cast of Melrose Place haven't disappeared from television.  Far from it, two of the cast members starred in ABC's recently wrapped-up sitcom "Desparate Housewives" (namely, Doug Savant and Marcia Cross) which ran for an impressive 8 seasons on ABC.  Heather Locklear, who was technically a guest star on Melrose Place, had a lengthy career even before "Melrose Place" and makes occasional guest appearances on TV.  Courtney Thorne-Smith is today a regular on "Two and a Half Men" (she's played Alan Harper's love interest for the past few seasons).

In any event, EW (you may find the EW article on the "Melrose Place" reunion HERE) had a video clip that featured ABC News correspondent Amy Robach (who happens to be married to former "Melrose Place" star Andrew Shue) — who sat down with the stars of "Melrose Place" during their recent EW reunion to find out what the cast from that 1990s show have been up to.  I'll keep this post brief by including the video below, or you can watch it by visiting http://youtu.be/r5K4eAE5_Lo:



For the record, all seasons of the original "Melrose Place" have been digitized and are therefore available on DVD or streaming via Amazon Prime and possibly others.  I'm not aware that the show is currently being rerun anywhere on television (cable or otherwise) right now, but you can definitely rent or stream it on Netflix.  The CW tried to reboot "Melrose Place" in 2009, but the reboot never took off, and it was cancelled before the the full season finished its run.

The Hostess With the Least-ess

There's a joke that Twinkies and cockroaches would be the only things likely to survive a nuclear bombing (which, if you'll pardon my going on a bit of tangent, reminds me that MGM Universal once released 1983's "The Day After" which starred Jason Robards, Steve Guttenberg, and John Lithgow, JoBeth Williams and others on DVD.  It's now out-of-print, but with the company now in the hands of Comcast, it could potentially be re-released, possibly even as a manufacture-on-demand item).

Anyway, the joke about the little, yellow, cream-filled Twinkies cakes that Baby Boomers and Gen Xers routinely had packed in their lunchboxes originated because they have an unusually lengthy shelf life (30+ days).  The reason: the cakes don't contain any dairy products at all, and also have various preservatives.  Of course, its fiction (see HERE) that Twinkies don't spoil or last for 30+ YEARS, but it brings me to the topic du jour: earlier this week, news surfaced that an ongoing strike could force Hostess Brands, Inc. to liquidate itself in bankruptcy.  There were reports that 24 of 33 Hostess plants had workers on strike.

On Friday, November 16, 2012, it happened: Hostess Brands, Inc. filed for bankruptcy protection.  The company's assets will be liquidated, and it made most of the major news outlets.  Huffington Post had one of the funnier headlines on this, writing it as an obituary for the the cartoon mascot of the company's Twinkie product, writing "Twinkie The Kid, Dead At 85" (see http://huff.to/S1hzwG for that story).  Retroland has a nice overview of the Twinkie the Kid mascot at http://bit.ly/QP8SXO.

This wasn't Hostess' first trip to the bankruptcy courts.

Hostess filed for bankruptcy reorganization in January 2012 (it's second time since 2004 after being spun off as an independent company), but Hostess Brands' (formerly Interstate Bakeries Corp.) CEO Greg Rayburn warned earlier this week "We simply do not have the financial resources to survive an ongoing national strike."  He added that the company would go into liquidation unless striking bakers didn't return to work by 4 p.m. Thursday, November 15, 2012.  Bakers were striking in protest to a new contract that was imposed by the bankruptcy court.  They didn't return to work, and he kept his word by filing for bankruptcy via liquidating the company's assets.  Now, they’re all out of jobs.

Hostess was a company with a long history in the U.S.  Much of the 82-year old company’s growth was via mergers and acquisitions.  However, The New York Times dealbook blog (see http://nyti.ms/T2LLVG for that posting) reported that the new private equity owners loaded the company with a boatload of debt, making it difficult to invest in new equipment or sustain an ongoing labor dispute. Earlier this year, Hostess had more than $860 million of debt.  However, sales of its iconic brands may help repay some of Hostess' creditors.

What's behind the bankruptcy and liquidation of Hostess Brands, Inc.?  Fortune summed it up this way (see http://bit.ly/UMlB9r):

"In truth there are no black hats or white knights in this tale. It's about shades of gray, where obstinacy, miscalculation, and lousy luck connived to create corporate catastrophe. Almost none of the parties involved would speak on the record. Still, it's clear from court documents and background interviews with a range of sources that practically nobody involved can shoot straight: The Teamsters remain stuck in a time warp, unwilling to sufficiently adapt in a competitive marketplace. The PE firm failed to turn Hostess around after taking it over. The hedgies can't see beyond their internal rates of return. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

The critical issue in the bankruptcy is legacy pensions. Hostess has roughly $2 billion in unfunded pension liabilities to its various unions' workers — the Teamsters but also the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union (which has largely chosen not to contest what Hostess wants to do — that is, to get out of much of that obligation)."

A Portfolio of Iconic and Valuable Brands

Beyond artificial cakes, the Hostess was also a major commercial bakery ... among it's best-known bread is Wonder Bread, an iconic white bread that many kids had their PB&J sandwiches made from back on the days before child nutrition was seen as important (and kids could still bring things made with peanut butter to school).  The company also sells other bread-products including Nature's Pride and Home Pride whole wheat breads, hamburger and hotdog buns, etc.

Hostess evolved over the years through a number of mergers and acquisitions. For example, back in the 1960s and 1970s, the company, then known Interstate Bakeries, bought more than a dozen regional bakeries that were located across the country.  A couple of decades later, it paid $330 million for the Continental Baking Company, and in the process, picked up a portfolio of brands including Wonder and Hostess.

Twinkie the Kid

Does this mean the end for Twinkie the Kid, the brand's iconic cartoon mascot in commercials in the 70's?

That remains to be seen, but I think it's pretty likely.

Hostess' Brands Are Likely to Be Sold

In a liquidation, the assets for the company are sold to buyers (perhaps in pieces) to repay the company's creditors, some of which consists of unfunded pension liabilities.

If I had to name some potential buyers, I'd say one potential buyer for at least some of the company’s (bread) assets could potentially be Mexico's Grupo Bimbo.   Bimbo already licenses the sale of Wonder bread in Mexico.  But the company has also acquired many American baked goods brands over the years, including Arnold breads, Entenmann's pastries, Thomas' English muffins and bagels, Stroehmann's/Oroweat, and Boboli pizza crusts.

The company [Bimbo] has tried to introduce it's own "Bimbo" brand of bread in the U.S., but in truth, many American women who still do the shopping for their families find the brand name to be offensive because it's a synonym for "slut" (this is akin to the days when GM's Chevrolet unit exported the the Chevy Nova to Latin America, which literally translated into Spanish meant, "doesn't go").  It's a bit of a cultural misfit with U.S culture.  Although the company even has it's own brand mascot known as Bimbo the Bear which is well-known south of the border, I'm not sure many buyers in the U.S. will soften to that.  More recently, the company has tried by introducing the Sara Lee brand of breads to supermarket shelves.  Most likely, however, many of the different bread brands sold by Hostess will continue to be sold, but by different companies.

On the cake side of the business, The New York Times deal blog (see http://nyti.ms/ZOtX61) reported "Flowers Foods, a baking goods company based in Thomasville, GA, has struck 18 deals since 1999. Last year, it bought Tasty Baking, the maker of Philadelphia's beloved Tastykakes, after the company nearly collapsed."

Indeed, American Public Media's Marketplace interviewed a bankruptcy attorney familiar with liquidations and they felt certain that some of the various brands belonging to Hostess would stick around, albeit under different ownership, and could potentially be quite valuable for reasons beyond the shelf space they currently command at supermarkets today.  You may listen to that story below, or by visiting http://bit.ly/UM03iG:



Possible Loss of American Pop Culture Icons

"The Twinkie was a popular cult icon, a reference point that was mentioned by Homer Simpson and even spawned Twinkie cookbooks," said Nancy Down, head librarian at the Browne Popular Culture Library at Bowling Green State University in Ohio. "It's pure nostalgia and it reminds us of a happy childhood. And even though I don't think I'd eat one today, it has that sweetness and shape, that perfect sort of handheld thing, that made it such a comfort food for so many people."

As a point of reference, Twinkies also had a lengthy list of TV and movie credits. For example, Archie Bunker always had one in his lunch on the sitcom "All in the Family", and the yellow cakes were also featured in the animated series "Family Guy" and "The Simpsons."  There are probably many others I can’t think of now.  The point is, this is something of a loss for American pop culture, even if it is pure junk food.

Looming Shortages of Twinkie Inventory?

Time business has a story with a headline "Time to Start Stockpiling Twinkies? Hostess in Limbo as Workers Strike" about the pending liquidation of Hostess Brands, Inc. which can be viewed at http://ti.me/ZRe9P2.  The article cites a Wall Street Journal article from earlier in the week (see http://on.wsj.com/PWDdCi for access to the article with a WSJ user name and password) about what the strike might mean for the company's storied brands.

In the interim, there are now stories of impending Twinkie shortages across the country, with people hoarding boxes the ubiquitous junk food.  By Friday evening, there were already more than 24,000 people who had signed an online petition calling for the White House to "nationalize the Twinkie industry."  That seems very unlikely since there's no shortage of commercial bakeries still in operation, but there are likely to be one or more buyers for the company's iconic brands.  My hope is that whoever buys the product has the good sense to try and make them healthier, which was a main issue the iconic products dealt with in recent years (For more background, definitely read Steve Ettlinger's book "Twinkie Deconstructed" which investigates, in order, every ingredient on the box of Twinkies as we knew them).  Regardless, for those mourning the loss, now might be time to resurrect a recipe for Twinkies that first emerged back in the seventies (they're loaded with hydrogenated fats, the kind cardiologists say are even worse than saturated fats), but for those individuals who cannot survive without their Twinkies, let me offer something something from an earlier time: baking at home.

Gloria Pitzer, a St. Clair, Michigan (originally) housewife who gained worldwide fame for her role as "The Recipe Detective" was discovered by the masses back in the 1970's thanks to an appearance on "The Phil Donahue Show", and she gave a recipe for what she called "Hopeless Twinkles" away on the show.  She recommended baking them in an oblong plan designed for baked potatoes, but I never found such a thing. Perhaps now, with the advent of the internet (see http://amzn.to/WgnhsW), those aren't as hard to find as they once were.  I should note that while her recipe may taste pretty darn close to the original, it really isn't a whole lot healthier than the original if you examine the ingredients.  But, I'll share that recipe with everyone below just in case you're worried about shortages in your local supermarket or 7-11 stores:

Hopeless Twinkles
by Gloria Pitzer
Makes 24

Filling:
1/2 cup butter or margarine
1/2 cup shortening
1 cup granulated sugar
3/4 cup evaporated milk
1 tablespoon vanilla

Cake:
3 large eggs
1 1/2 teaspoons vanilla
1 cup whole milk
1/2 cup butter
1 1/2 cups sugar
1 teaspoon salt
3 1/2 teaspoons baking powder
2 cups all-purpose flour

To make filling: Cream butter 5 minutes at medium speed. Add shortening a little at a time. Cream 3 to 4 minutes. Add sugar a little at a time. Mix milk and vanilla, and add to mixture, scraping bowl frequently. The longer you beat mixture, the better it becomes.

To make cake: Preheat oven to 350 degrees. Grease two 8-inch square cake pans or baking dishes or use a 13-inch by 9-inch by 2-inch pan. Beat eggs and vanilla together for 1 minute, then add other items one at a time, beating a minute after each addition. Pour into prepared pans.

Bake 30 to 35 minutes (40 to 45 minutes in oblong pan), or until toothpick inserted in center comes out clean. Cool cake in pan.

It's best to use cake when it is slightly frozen. About 30 minutes in the freezer works best.

Cut cake into 1 1/2-inch by 3 1/2-inch bars. Put bottom side of each bar on wax paper, spread half of the bars with filling and top with unfrosted bar, sandwich style. Refrigerate up to 2 weeks; freeze up to 1 year.

Before you set up shop as a Twinkie baker, as I already noted, in all likelihood, most the Hostess' brands, are likely to return under new ownership before very long.

Author P.S., November 20, 2012: There is news that the bankruptcy judge Robert Drain who is overseeing the Hostess case asked both the company and the unions to join him for a mediation session to try and broker a new contract.  Both sides have agreed to go into mediation to try to avoid the company being shut down with some 18,000 workers losing their jobs, so there's a possibility Hostess may survive as a company.  APM's Marketplace covered that news below, or you may visit their website directly at http://bit.ly/QWcxTE:

However, as of the evening of Nov. 20, 2012, Bloomberg News is reporting (see http://bloom.bg/SaOXRB) that Hostess failed to reach a deal with union representatives during a mediation session. In essence, a last-ditch mediation session with its bakers' union over a new contract imposed in bankruptcy court failed, bringing the company closer to liquidation.  If the company goes into liquidation, its brands and recipes will be sold off to raise funds to pay creditors.

Author P.S., January 5, 2013:  As of January 5, 2013, The Wall Street Journal is reporting (see http://on.wsj.com/SbK0dD, note WSJ subscription may be required for access) that Flowers Foods Inc. and Grupo Bimbo SAB are in discussions to acquire pieces of Hostess Brands Inc.'s bread business according to people familiar with the talks.  Readers may recall that I cited BOTH companies when I wrote about the liquidation.  Incidentally, on November 30, 2012, WNYC's radio program "Last Chance Foods" covered Twinkies and spoke with Steve Ettlinger, author of "Twinkie, Deconstructed".  It's worth checking out at http://wny.cc/RtsQYr.

Author P.S., January 11, 2013:  The Wall Street Journal and other news media reports that Flowers Foods, Inc., which I named above as a potential acquirer for at least some of Hostess' brands will buy the bread brands from Hostess for $390 million (see http://on.wsj.com/10nmiyO for details).  The bid is subject to court approval since it involves a bankruptcy liquidation.  The news applies to the bread brands (Wonder, Home Pride, etc.) only, but the press is also reporting that Hostess is expected to announce buyers for its famed dessert cakes (Twinkies, etc.) over the next several weeks.

Author P.S., March 12, 2013:  Hostess is gone, but Twinkies are back. Marketplace reports that Twinkies are comin' back. (see http://bit.ly/YaUM15)  Two private equity firms confirmed they're the winning bidders in the Hostess bankruptcy auction. They reportedly paid $410 million for the brand.  Twinkies will be back on the shelves by summer. Though, if you had any left from when Hostess went broke in November, they're totally still good, too.

Author P.S., July 9, 2013:  Marketplace reports that (listen or read the news at http://bit.ly/12WNQKu), Twinkies (as well as Ding Dongs and Ho Hos) will be returning to store shelves.  Officially, the reported date they will return to stores will be on July 15, 2013 -- less than a year after the old Hostess declared bankruptcy.  The new owners, specifically C. Dean Metropoulos and Apollo Global Management, thanks to the company's bankruptcy, have been able to slash costs because the people who were hired back are now non-unionized (that may not be good news for the employees, but its great for the owners), because the new owners don't have to fund big union pensions that dogged the old company.  Although an old Indianapolis Hostess plant on Shadeland Avenue is expected to be fired up again, as is another in Columbus, Georgia, while yet another plant in Columbus may be used as a distribution center,  most of the other bakery locations around the country are now closed - permanently.  Slashing distribution costs, much associated with rigid union contracts, has been a big part of the resurrected company's business strategy.  Some of that could impact the product itself.  For example, they will now ship to warehouses rather than to individual stores, enabled by freezing Twinkies so they can be shipped further and can be stored longer (45 days vs. 25 for the old way) which is a big deal in terms of supply-chain management.  The new owners say they plan to expand the Hostess brand by offering healthier products and new varieties, such as gluten-free varieties (if ever there was a "trendy" food, that's it, because the incidence of people with diagnosed rather than perceived gluten allergies or autoimmune Celiac disease is estimated to be 0.55%, or one in every 200 people).  There have been no announced plans (I am aware of) on a variety without carbohydrates or the über-unhealthy hydrogenated fats used in the "creamy" filling, which would definitely be "healthier", but only time will tell, I guess.

Is the Future Pay TV Model As Safe as The Atlantic Believes It Is?

Friday's (November 9, 2012) Marketplace by American Public Media had an interesting conversation with Derek Thompson, a senior editor at The Atlantic, about the future of television.  In that interview, Marketplace's Tess Vigeland asks Mr. Thompson whether television is moving towards a more a la carte model where consumers can pay for only the shows they care to watch?

I have speculated in several posts whether that's the direction TV is going (among them, HERE, HERE, and HERE).  Much of it has to do with increasing fragmentation of the viewer market, hence the challenge of capturing advertising dollars for programming.

There's another factor at work, too.

Back on July 15, 2012, the Associated Press' reporter Ryan Nakashima wrote an article entitled "Behind the TV channel blackouts: stalling profits" in which he cited a spat that took place earlier this year between Viacom and DirecTV.  However, that wasn't the only such incident, we've seen others between cable giants Time Warner Cable and Hearst Television and various others.  At the heart of the AP article is the fact that content providers have become steadily more profitable while distributors (such as cable and satellite providers) that pay to carry the channels have seen their profitability virtually stagnate as they fight each other for subscribers, hence the bickering has become almost a routine experience.

Most of us have seen the warnings, which now take the form of ads aired on local network affiliate stations about asking your cable/satellite provider to carry certain networks.

During the first six and a half months of 2012, 22 fee disputes involving the price of broadcast TV signals have caused channel blackouts, according to the American TV Alliance. That's up from 15 blackouts in all of 2011. There were just four in 2010.

Anyway, The Atlantic's Derek Thompson wrote (see HERE):

"A small clutch of media companies owns 95% of the channels you watch. This oligopoly has the power to dictate terms to the cable/satellite companies that you pay each month. These cable/satellite providers are legally obligated to offer less popular channels alongside must-have networks like TBS and ESPN. That bundle costs the average household about $80, with roughly half going back to the media companies in 'affiliate fees' and roughly half staying with the cable companies in infrastructure costs and profit. Cable companies didn't invent the bundle. They're prisoners of the bundle, just like you and I are."

While lawmakers are exploring the idea of mandating a la carte pricing, Mr. Thompson told Marketplace that the numbers just don't add up, which explains why the big media giants have the bundled prices they do.  If you're Disney, they don't want to sell just ESPN, they also want to sell their less-watched networks like The Disney Channel, and their contracts force the distributors into such an arrangement.

"You watch whenever you want, you don't have to pay for ABC Family or MTV2. That would be lovely. The problem is that when you do the back-of-the-envelope math, it becomes very clear very quickly that TV on demand would probably be either much more expensive than we think or much lower quality than we'd accept." said Mr. Thompson.

The interview is definitely worth listening to.  I've provided that below, or you may read/listen to that story directly by visiting  http://bit.ly/2bSIERW:

Derek Thompson claims "The Internet, ironically, is less likely to disrupt video the same way that it's done for newspapers or music. We still have the same number of paid TV customers now that we did five years ago, during a recession. It doesn't seem like doomed times just yet for cable, but that doesn't mean it won't in 5 or 10 years," adds Thompson.

He claims the cost of content continues to grow because it's labor-intensive.  Yet his claim that traditional video (TV and movies) has held on to paid TV customers is suspect.  There is some evidence to suggest that's not true.

Cutting the Cord

In August, the Wall Street Journal reported (see http://on.wsj.com/SHUo7y) that publicly traded cable, satellite and phone companies had a combined net loss of about 200,000 subscribers in the second quarter of 2012, earnings reports showed, about 0.2% of the roughly 100 million pay-TV subscribers.  Also cited were some Sanford C. Bernstein estimates that the overall industry had shed more than 400,000 subscribers during the period when results for closely held operators are included.

The one upside is that broadband has continued to grow even as pay TV subscriptions decline.  But with fewer subscribers to pay the bills, the increases content providers are selling noted in the AP article are being disputed with growing frequency.  Tight economic times may have prompted some consumers to cut the cord (see HERE).

As might be expected, the big media conglomerates like Disney and Viacom dispute those statistics.  The following quote comes from the Wall Street Journal article (see above).

"Dish Network Corp. Chairman Charlie Ergen, acknowledge that people are switching to cheaper alternatives. He even cites his own children's behavior as proof.  Others, particularly on the entertainment side, dismiss the idea."

However, the Wall Street Journal quotes Craig Moffett, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein who points that the year-on-year growth rate [for cable and satellite providers] is below the level at which new households are being formed, suggesting "there are homes that are cutting the cord."  But they aren't cutting the cord completely, so far, it's basically just for pay TV.

Where are they going?

There is now growing evidence that consumers are switching to lower-cost alternatives, including broadcast (yes, it still exists, indeed, since the switch to digital, the number of options via broadcast has grown, see my post HERE for a few examples), as as well as internet sources including YouTube (I wrote about how there are now a few series developed for distribution via the internet by real Hollywood talent that are drawing loyal viewership), as well as subscription services like Hulu, Amazon Prime and Netflix, most of which can be viewed not only from personal devices, but also on the television with media players such as Roku and rivals made by Sony and others.

Indeed, Ericsson ConsumerLab in Sweden did a qualitative research survey of consumers not just in the U.S., but also in Australia, Austria, Brazil, China, Germany, the Netherlands, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, the UK, and South Korea.  The study, "TV & Video Consumer Trend Report 2011," found more than 44% of the respondents reported watching Internet-based on-demand TV more than once per week, while about 80% watch broadcast TV more than once per week. (see HERE)

However, Ericsson study also found that in terms of what consumers want most from their TVs, good quality programming remains the top factor.

Is there a way to reconcile these demands?

Basically, the business model is built around the presumption that advertisers pay for content.  One way is to pay a higher price for channels viewers actually WANT.  But that is likely to cost more.  It's kind of like healthcare insurance.  The only way to keep up with the rapidly-growing costs to care for sick people is to offset them by including enough healthy people who don't use the services into the equation.  Tess Vigeland did make a comparison to health insurance in her interview, and Mr. Thompson did acknowledge the comparison was relevant.

"Every single time you pay, let's say $80 a month to Time Warner Cable, ESPN gets $5 of that. So I sort of calculated that if you wanted to buy ESPN alone, you might have to pay $10 or even $20 just to get ESPN every single month to offset the lost advertising," Derek Thompson said in the Marketplace interview.

My local NPR station, WNYC runs a show called "The Takeaway" which I referenced in another post on the 50th anniversary of The Jetsons (see HERE for that post) (and above) and they spoke with Brian Stelter of the New York Times' Media Decoder Blog this summer. In that conversation, they discuss the concept of a la carte pay television, and noted that carriers like cable companies are finally beginning to chip away at the bundled pricing for channels, albeit on a limited basis so far. Have a listen below, or by visiting http://bit.ly/2brQ2Dd:



The alternative hasn't yet been factored into Mr. Thompson's equation, but may soon need to be considered.

Right now, some original programming is being distributed via the internet, including a new sitcom referenced in one of my previous posts known as "Husbands" which is distributed via YouTube, albeit in short pieces.  But there's also a possibility they could modify that and make it available via one of (or all of) the online distribution channels including Hulu, Amazon Prime and Netflix.

Mr. Thompson, in his article for The Atlantic, does acknowledge the looming threat of the internet, writing "Combined with a second trend -- the accelerating exodus of attention away from television -- the TV business might really be in trouble. But this second trend is still more of a projection than a reality."

He argues it's not a factor at the moment, by writing "One hundred million households still pay for a bundle of networks. That number isn't really going down. With the pace of household formation tripling in the last year, it could even go up. The number of cord-cutters -- households that have replaced the bundle with over-the-Internet video like Netflix -- is in the low single-digit millions."

However, he neglects the fact that a) most younger consumers are more likely to watch TV programming on their mobile devices, including smartphones and tablets, and b) those are the very same consumers who are now forming new households.  Remember when they said that landline telephone carriers like SBC and Verizon had a stable, utility business?

Well, that went the way of the telegraph ... gone.  Today, many consumers have only their mobile phones as their only telephone number, and younger consumers are much more likely to fit into this category than their older counterparts.  What makes him so certain they won't view cable TV the same way?

Companies acknowledge the shift.

Indeed, earlier this month, AT&T Inc. said it was laying the groundwork to phase out all of its old-fashioned telephone service (see the Wall Street Journal article at http://on.wsj.com/Ukv9rE for details).  The company announced it wants to eventually decommission the technology behind its decades-old, copper-line phone network that currently covers 76 million homes and businesses in 22 states.  It's a similar story at Verizon, whose FiOS broadband service is rapidly outpacing the revenue for it's old, legacy landline service (see http://on.wsj.com/RTEx7f for more).

The projection that cable is somehow immune from this long-term trend remains a big unknown right now.  As the Boston Globe reported (see http://b.globe.com/TQfR37), "Fifty percent of the people who watch online video are under the age of 35," according to Brad Adgate, senior vice president of research at Horizon Media.  As viewership either migrates from television to online or diffuses between them, so do ad dollars.

Genuine TV producer including Brian Robbins, a veteran producer of TV shows including "Smallville" and "One Tree Hill" are embracing internet content, starting their own YouTube channel dubbed "AwesomenessTV", which targets kids and teens with everything from dramas like "The Runaways" to talk shows.  Another TV veteran, Jane Espenson, is also pushing fast in that direction with content aimed at adults, so the speed of change might not be so theoretical after all.  It should be noted that Ms. Espenson's "Husbands" internet sitcom was self-financed, and raised funds for season 2 via fans who paid for the the second season through a successful Kickstarter campaign (see HERE) which raised the $60,000 needed to pay for the second season (see HERE for more), and have set their sights on season 3 already with a goal of $75,000.

As the Boston Globe notes "Much of the online content boom can be attributed to the shrinking of costs to produce high-quality video content. A couple of cameras, some computer programs, a few actors, and you're good to go."

To be sure, TV doesn't show signs of the growing online threat ... yet.

For example, today, the Associated Press, in an article entitled "YouTube furthers bet on original programming, though results are still elusive" written by Jake Coyle wrote:

"Since it was founded in 2005, YouTube has been predominately the home of user-created video. But by putting out a welcome mat to Hollywood, the site is trying to lure viewers to stay for longer and coax advertisers to pair their brands with known talent.

Robert Kyncl, YouTube's global head of content and the leader of its channels initiative, says the first year has been one of defining where YouTube's channels fit into the media landscape.

'I feel we're 300 percent smarter than we were in January,' he says."

Shishir Mehrotra, director of product management at YouTube, said in a separate interview "Up until now, the primary noun on YouTube has been video. You watch a video, you share a video, a video has view counts and so on.  We're gradually shifting the site so the primary noun on the site is the channel, and you tune into the channels that you care about."

"TV has generally made more money by showing more and more advertising," added Mehrotra. "Our view is that we should actually show you fewer ads but make sure the ads are actually being seen."

APM's Marketplace also covered YouTube programming (see http://bit.ly/UpaWXz).  The primary motive for Google is advertising.  But with momentum like what Jane Espensen is doing with original programming on YouTube, the argument that cable subscriptions are likely to hold up without interruption into the future seems suspect.  My local NPR station WNYC also addressed producing TV content for the internet in May 2012.  You may listen to that below, or by visiting http://bit.ly/2bDnBkQ.

NBC Universal to Launch Cozi TV in January

Once upon a time, reruns of old TV shows were shown in syndication, often at odd times of day as "filler" programming. Although that still happens to some extent, then came cable, and when that was still comparatively new, there was a network called Nickelodeon which featured programming geared towards children. But the Nickelodeon cable network realized it had a bit of a problem: after dark, their core audience went to bed and was not allowed to watch television! So executives at Nickelodeon came up with a plan to keep advertisers on board which they called "Nick at Night", with programming consisting mainly of reruns of old network sitcoms to lure adults in to watching it. The plan worked - adults did tune in to watch programs they were familiar with but hadn't seen in a while.

Over time, as the number of channels expanded, Viacom turned Nick at Night into "TV Land", a completely separate channel (although Nickelodeon still airs some older programming on Nick@Nite it's now mainly geared towards kids). However, since the advent of digital television, the number of channels has expanded significantly, and today, TV Land isn't alone in showing reruns. In fact, TV Land has been criticized by viewers on Facebook for only showing classic television during odd times and typically in blocks all together rather than an integral part of the programming schedule, instead leaving prime time open to first-run series such as the popular original show "Hot In Cleveland" which stars Betty White, Valerie Bertinelli, Wendie Malick and Jane Leeves as well as "Happily Divorced" which stars "The Nanny" actress Fran Drescher.

Host of New Channels Assume the Former Role of TV Land

Fortunately, today, there are a few other networks operating in the classic TV space, notably RTV (Retro Television), Antenna TV and Me-TV (which stands for Memorable Entertainment Television). Of these, I believe all (or most) are available without cable or satellite service (depending on which media market you live in), but via the digital airwaves.

Cool!

For the moment, I have found some of my personal favs on Me-TV. For example, this past summer, they ran a programming schedule called "The Summer of Me-TV", but among the shows that routinely filled their lineup were "The Bob Newhart Show", "Batman", "Get Smart", "Green Acres", "Gumby", the original "Hawaii Five-0", "Happy Days", "Laverne & Shirley", "Lost In Space", "Love American Style", "Mary Tyler Moore", and "That Girl".  I know, some of them are actually '60s shows that carried over into the '70s (such as "Get Smart" and "Green Acres").

Rival Antenna TV also has a number of shows worth looking into, including "Maude", "The Partridge Family", "Soap", "WKRP in Cincinnati", "Sanford and Son", "Three's Company", "Good Times", "All in the Family" and "Adam-12" as well as a number of shows from the '60s and even one or two from the '80s (who remembers "Too Close for Comfort"?). The simple fact is that much of this is now on the airwaves, so set your DVRs!! I don't have RTV in my area (which is the NYC media market, but I believe that network has better coverage in smaller media markets), whose lineup includes "Fat Albert" and "Archie" cartoons, "The Bill Cosby Show" (the original, not the '80s blockbuster "Cosby Show" which did not carry Bill's name) as well as the original "Starsky & Hutch".

Coming in January 2013: Cozi TV

However, joining these retro rerun networks in January 2013 will be a new addition from NBC Universal to be known as Cozi TV. It will be introduced in most of NBC-owned network affiliate markets (except Hartford, Connecticut, although half of Connecticut also receives New York City stations). Cozi TV will try to differentiate itself with movies that haven't aired in a while, but the new network will also be able to draw from NBC Universal's own vast programming library, including more than a few shows that haven't received much recent airplay, including "Magnum P.I.," "Marcus Welby M.D.," "Charlie's Angels," "The Lone Ranger," "Highway to Heaven," "The Six Million Dollar Man," and "The Bionic Woman."

Cozi TV also has agreements in place with other distributors, including Sony Pictures, so it will not be drawn exclusively from NBC Universal, but the new network has said it will also leave time ample in the programming schedule for local stations to utilize for local newscasts, local college and/or high school sports or, what has become common in the multi-channel TV environment, paid advertising.

The new network's initial branding will be: "Cozi TV. The easiest decision you'll make all day."

Have a look at the commercial that's been prepared for Cozi TV below, or by visiting http://youtu.be/8ANDOXSsHL4:



In the end, competition is usually a good thing.  I would say if your favorite old shows aren't on one of the existing networks, there's a good chance they could appear on Cozi TV.  Set your DVRs accordingly!

Datsun to Get Brand Reboot After 30 Years

In early October 2012, Japanese auto giant Nissan announced plans to resurrect a brand it stopped selling nearly 30 years ago: Datsun.

Baby Boomers and Gen Xers may remember the Datsun brand because the "Nissan" brand didn't even exist in the U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand or elsewhere until the early 1980s. Officially, the decision to change the name Datsun to Nissan in the U.S. was announced in the autumn of 1981. The rationale was that the name change would "help the company pursue a global strategy", and the Nissan brand was a key component of that strategy. Datsun was rebranded to Nissan (at considerable expense to the company) in many markets in spite of having already built considerable brand equity in the "Datsun" brand over the years.

The name change campaign actually lasted for several years between 1982 to 1984, and was quite costly for the company. Among the costs incurred were changing the signs at over 1,100 Datsun dealerships to Nissan, as well as a costly ad campaign to introduce the Nissan brand to American consumers, and an awkward period where both the Nissan and Datsun logos appeared on automobiles (at one point, cars had logos with "Datsun by Nissan", part of the effort to familiarize American consumers with the "new" Nissan brand name (in fact, Nissan was always the company's name in Japan).

Below is a 1979 television commercial for what was arguably one the company's last campaigns for the Datsun brand in the United States (alternatively, it can be seen at http://youtu.be/5YuV1hHzISI).



Why reboot a brand that has been part of the history books for 30 years?

The Datsun brand is being reintroduced in hopes of attracting "aspirational customers" in high-growth, emerging markets. The company CEO Carlos Ghosn claimed it will rely on Datsun's reputation for small, sporty, inexpensive cars to attract young consumers in the world's developing economies.  The Wall Street Journal reported (see the article at http://on.wsj.com/Ul9aqt, note that a Wall Street Journal online subscription may be required to access the article) that "Datsun is scheduled to hit the road in India, Indonesia and Russia in 2014."

But Mr. Ghosn said he wanted to announce the long-rumored revival in Indonesia to underline the growing importance of the Southeast Asian market."  Consumers in the announced markets can expect Datsuns to be a decidedly bare-bones vehicle compared to what U.S. and Japanese consumers buy, but a car that's intended to compete with low-cost automakers such as China's Chery Automobile or India's Tata Motors, which are now exporting their own low-cost vehicles to many developing markets around the world.  Those car brands actually look kind of like the 1979 Datsun in the commercial above did!

Nissan believes that it, as a global automaker, can effectively compete in this rapidly-growing segment of the automobile market.  The company plans to sell Datsuns for around $5,000, which is less than half the price of Nissan's least-expensive vehicles sold in the U.S.  However, the company's much-vaunted quality could actually put the Chinese brands at a very big competitive disadvantage.

Don't expect to see any new Datsuns in the U.S. anytime soon.

To sell a car for prices that low, many of the standard features that are required (such as airbags) will not be included in the new Datsuns, and the cut-rate priced cars wouldn't be allowed in the U.S. because the cars couldn't pass U.S. safety, emissions or fuel-efficiency requirements. But, the next time you visit India, Indonesia or Russia in 2014, you might just see Datsuns in those markets.

Time magazine suggests Americans may soon see some ultra-cheap cars in the U.S., even if they aren't Datsuns (see that article by visiting http://ti.me/TBByC6), writing "Within three years, though, we may finally get to see whether American drivers will be interested in a 'luxury' version of the bare-bones [Tata] car".  However, the outlook for success remains unclear.  Who remembers the Yugo?!

Author P.S., October 20, 2014:  Businessweek reports (see http://buswk.co/1vKjtoU) Datsun's second life, in India, isn't doing very well.  Apparently, low prices alone aren't sufficient for success even in the developing world.

Is There A Brady Bunch Family Feud?

America loves a family feud, so much so that "Family Feud" has remained a popular TV game show for the past 36 years (it was introduced back in 1976 by serial gameshow producers Mark Goodson and Bill Todman, but has since been exported to venues such as MGM casinos). So what if the "family" is entirely fictional, as in a television family?

For a number of years, there have been rumors of a family feud brewing between the two actresses that played the two oldest Brady sisters, notably Maureen McCormick who played Marcia Brady and Eve Plumb who played younger sister Jan Brady. I don't have to tell anyone who watched "The Brady Bunch" that Jan Brady had more than a few episodes featuring her trying to get out of Marcia Brady's shadow. One line describes that: "Marcia, Marcia, Marcia". In fact, the line was so memorable to Gen X viewers that in the 1996 feature film "A Very Brady Sequel" which creator and producer Sherwood Schwartz was involved in, featured a line from the daughter of Jan Brady's guidance counselor (played by drag queen RuPaul Charles) in which the African-American middle girl who was arguing with her sister said "Moesha, Moesha, Moesha" as a parody of Jan Brady's own line. That clip can be viewed below, or by visiting http://youtu.be/vhdXsPfweR8:



The rumors of the Brady girls' family feud are just that: rumors. Indeed, back in 1981, Maureen McCormick and Eve Plumb did co-star one of several sequels to "The Brady Bunch" entitled "The Brady Girls Get Married", which began as a 3-part made for television movie, but was later picked up as a sitcom entitled "The Brady Brides" which ran on NBC for one season. However, that was the last time the two co-starred together. In subsequent reunions produced by Sherwood Schwartz, the character of Jan Brady was either not featured, or recast with a different actress, hence the rumors began.

Sure, Eve Plumb appeared in an episode of "Fantasy Island", in much the same way as fellow cast members Florence Henderson, Maureen McCormick and others appeared on episodes of "The Love Boat", which were known as places where out-of-work actors, actresses, comedians and musicians could find temporary work. There were also occasional opportunities such as appearances on celebrity editions on gameshows or ABC's "Battle of the Network Stars", and there was an ill-fated variety show produced by Sid and Marty Krofft (best known for their wierd puppet-characters "H.R. Pufnstuf") but more permanent or serious work offers simply didn't really materialize for Eve or many of the other cast members. In spite of childhood celebrity, life as adults wasn't paved with riches for most of them.

By the 1990s, the rumor was presumed by many to be true, in large part, because Eve Plumb did not appear in many of the various Brady sequels. Then, in 1995, Eve Plumb appeared on the now-defunct UPN's (UPN was merged with the WB network to become the CW network) daytime talkshow Jenny Jones' in an episode on the subject of "Child Stars: Where Are They Now?". Not surprisingly, that clip can be found on YouTube, which I'm including below, or you may find it at http://youtu.be/t58bVuos3Hk:



Then, there was an effort to reunite the cast on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" to commemorate the 40th Anniversary for "The Brady Bunch" in 2009 (we sometimes forget that "The Brady Bunch" actually began in 1969). Indeed, on August 31, 2009 Brady castmember Susan Olsen (who played Cindy Brady) appeared on NBC's Today Show to discuss "The Brady Bunch Variety Hour" which she called in a book she co-authored with Ted Nichelson entitled "Love to Love You Bradys" calling it "history's worst show". The book also discusses some of what took place behind the scenes, including drug abuse among cast members (although she tells the Today Show that she wouldn't mention it unless fellow castmember Maureen McCormick had already discussed that). It should also be noted that Eve Plumb did not appear on "The Brady Munch Variety Hour".

However, in fairness to Eve Plumb, she's carried Jan Brady around with her for a lifetime, and as all of her fellow Brady Bunch cast members have agreed, they did find themselves pretty much typecast thanks to Sherwood Schwartz's aggressive sales of the show in syndication back in the 1970s. They also didn't receive residual payments (as actors/actresses do today), or anything from home video/DVD sales. True, every child star deals with growing up as a child star and more than a few have "turned bad"). For the most part, the cast of "The Brady Bunch" have turned out pretty well in spite of the drug culture that existed in the entertainment business at that time.

Then, in 2008, following in the footsteps of fellow castmembers Barry Williams (who played Greg Brady) who published a book entitled "Growing Up Brady" in 2000, and then Christopher Knight (who played Peter Brady on "The Brady Bunch", and starred in a reality television show on VH1 known as "My Fair Brady" in 2009). Maureen McCormick released her own autobiography entitled "Here's the Story" in 2011 to some fanfare. In the book, she admits to many of her own issues, including her own drug abuse and an abortion. But, she also made joking references to a lesbian kiss with Eve Plumb on a television appearance (she claims on a late-night talkshow, see the clip below) which she discussed repeatedly promoting her own autobiography, which may have helped sell books, but didn't exactly make fellow castmate Eve Plumb happy. Maureen McCormick (Marcia Brady) appeared on WGN in Chicago discussing her book, which can be seen below or at http://youtu.be/65WTPU1bUlQ:



Clearly, Maureen was joking about it, but in fairness to Eve Plumb, she wasn't benefitting from "Here's the Story" bestseller status. What's more, she's carried Jan Brady around for a lifetime, and as all of her fellow Brady castmembers have agreed, they did find themselves pretty much typecast thanks to Sherwood Schwartz's aggressive sales of the show in syndication back in the 1970s. Fellow castmember Susan Olsen (a.k.a. Cindy Brady) put things in appropriate perspective in the following video which can be seen below, or at http://youtu.be/FdnMKzZICbA:



Basically, we have Cindy Brady putting the entire Brady Girls' family feud in perspective: Maureen made jokes that weren't very considerate of Eve, hence the "feud" is more about using another fellow castmember to push a book than it is about ill feelings of Jan Brady who was forever in older sister Marcia's shadow. In reality, the two worked together in the past and worked well together. However, if there is anyone to "blame" for the fact that the two no longer regularly talk, it's not Eve Plumb, but Maureen McCormick, whose bestselling autobiography was heavily promoted.  However, as Susan Olsen states, Eve Plumb isn't really mad at Maureen McCormick, she's just indifferent about their friendship.

I have already written about a potential Brady Bunch reboot in 2014 (see http://goo.gl/tE0ur for that post), but the reboot is focused mainly around Bobby Brady.  Is there a possibility for the two oldest Brady sisters to patch things up? Certainly, but obviously, some things will need to be addressed before that happens. Perhaps that can happen in time for the 50th anniversary for "The Brady Bunch" in 2019?  Stay tuned!

Beverly Hills Cop To Get A TV Reboot?

Before his voice-over roles as Donkey in "Shrek" and all of it's sequels, Eddie Murphy was a regular cast member on "Saturday Night Live" from 1980 to 1984 and also a stand-up comedian. But he began his film career before leaving SNL in 1982's "48 Hrs." which co-starred Nick Nolte. The next year, he starred in "Trading Places" with fellow SNL alumnus Dan Aykroyd. He solidified his place as box office gold the following year's (in 1984) smash "Beverly Hills Cop" in which he was the lead actor. The trailer for that film can be seen on YouTube below, or by visiting http://youtu.be/Sxwjp9IqDhg:



The film also featured some of the most memorable theme music, particularly the instrumental "Axel F" (which stands for Axel Foley, the character played by Eddie Murphy in the "Beverly Hills Cop" film. "Axel F" was performed by Harold Faltermeyer. You may download it at the Google Play music store at http://goo.gl/YNSXb.

At the time, the producers reportedly wanted to turn the "Beverly Hills Cop" into franchise with a weekly television series, but Mr. Murphy declined the TV offer, although he was willing to do a film sequel instead. "Beverly Hills Cop II" opened in 1987 and was also very successful. But he was also busy in a variety of other films, including "Coming To America" which he co-produced as well as various other films.

A decade later, "Beverly Hills Cop III" was released in 1994. That film, while profitable, wasn't quite as successful for Paramount Studios as the preceding films. However, the third film did address some story questions raised in the first two films and, theoretically, opened up a possibility for a television series in spite of Mr. Murphy's lack of willingness. I, like many observers, felt the opportunity for a "Beverly Hills Cop" television series had really passed, particularly with so much time having elapsed since the last film was released.

Apparently, I was wrong.  Axel Foley isn't just a footnote in movie history.

In September 2012, Deadline Hollywood reported that CBS has actually committed to a pilot for a series offshoot from the "Beverly Hills Cop" movie franchise. The films' star Eddie Murphy and "The Shield" creator Shawn Ryan will executive produce the Sony TV-produced project, which has received a pilot production commitment.

This week, Humor Mill reported (see http://humormillmag.com/?p=7387) that the show may have found its lead in actor Brandon T. Jackson. Mr. Jackson is best known for roles in films like "Tropic Thunder", "Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief" and "Big Mommas: Like Father, Like Son", would play the son of Eddie Murphy's Axel Foley. Mr. Murphy is also planning to reprise his original role in a guest-star role capacity with the focus of the series being on the son.

I cannot say this is one TV show I am eagerly awaiting, but I'm willing to wait and see. The devil, as they say, is always in the details. But we have news on who will be starring in this show. Details on exactly when this could air (after all, CBS has only committed to a pilot) remains to be seen, but I would guess the fall season of 2013 is the earliest we're likely to see anything.

Life After Lucas: The Star Wars Franchise and Where Are They Now: Mark Hamill

Earlier this week, on October 30, 2012, there was news (see http://usat.ly/VfNkEK or http://buswk.co/SsTQ6v for details) that the Walt Disney Co. would acquire George Lucas' Lucasfilm Ltd. for $4.05 billion. Talks between Disney and Lucas reportedly began a year and a half ago, Walt Disney Co. CEO Robert Iger told investors on a conference call.

Mr. Lucas, who owns 100% of the film production company named after himself, will get half the purchase price in cash and the rest in Disney stock. At the time of the announcement, we learned that Mr. Lucas would receive about 40 million Disney shares, making him the second-largest non-institutional shareholder with about 2.2% of Disney shares, according to data compiled by Bloomberg (the largest is the trust of late Apple Inc. co-founder Steve Jobs, who sold Pixar to Disney in 2006). Mr. Lucas will officially remain on staff as a "creative consultant" on future "Star Wars" films. Perhaps not coincidentally, both parties simultaneously announced a new, seventh "Star Wars" film, to be called "Star Wars: Episode VII," with a targeted theatrical release sometime in 2015.

Many Star Wars geeks were frightened about the prospect of having Disney somehow ruin the "Star Wars" film franchise (although truth be told, Mr. Lucas learned very early that the movie was but a tiny piece of the overall "franchise" or money machine which began with toy lightsabers, action figures, etc. and morphed into video games, trading cards, and countless other things that could be sold to fans), perhaps by inserting the company's iconic cartoon characters such as Mickey Mouse, Tinkerbell, and various other Disney characters together with Lucas' C3PO and R2D2 in some kind of odd combination.

The Associated Press ran an article on October 31, 2012 entitled "Disney's recent acquisitions of Marvel, Pixar show a successful hands-off approach" indicating The Walt Disney Co. had earned credibility with die-hard fans of other film franchises such as Marvel Comics and Pixar by keeping its fingerprints off them.

The article also featured a quote from a Bernstein Research analyst Todd Juenger, who told the AP: "They've been pretty clearly hands-off in terms of letting the creative minds of those companies do what they do best. Universally, people think they pulled it off."

We've also learned that Mr. Lucas himself sought a buyer like Disney in order "to protect" the "Star Wars" franchise and keep it going long into the future. After all, Mr. Lucas, who was age 68 at the time of the announcement, wants to retire! Who can blame him, and with a rich payout like the one he'll receive, he can probably afford to retire "in a galaxy far, far away"!  However, he spoke with Kathleen Kennedy in the following video (alternatively, you may watch it by visiting http://youtu.be/YyqlTi7lkhY):



Perhaps that was an effort to allay the concerns of fans, or maybe it was to protect the value of his Disney shares.  However, for those who weren't aware of it, "Star Wars" was THE iconic science fiction film that originally premiered in 1977, but spawned a host of sequels, prequels, and even an embarrassing television Christmas special in 1978 that has remained in circulation thanks to crude videocassette recordings and nerds copying the odd holiday special. Authors Gael Fashingbauer Cooper and Brian Bellmont accurately wrote in "Whatever Happened to Pudding Pops: The Lost Toys, Tastes, and Trends of the 70s and 80s" (catch my post on that HERE or http://goo.gl/jAIF0):


THE STAR WARS HOLIDAY SPECIAL

The Star Wars Holiday Special THE prospect of 1978's Star Wars Holiday Special was enough to make our light sabers tingle with glee—a bonus chapter of the tale as we eagerly waited for the Empire to strike back. In practice, though, it was a disaster of intergalactic proportions.

The plot, such as it was, focused on Chewbacca's family—his wife Malla, son Lumpy, and freakish (and, no doubt, flea-ridden and stinky) father Itchy—as they waited for Chewie to return home. The original Star Wars gang made perfunctory appearances, including an overly made-up Mark Hamill and a stumbly Carrie Fisher. And it all spiraled even further into surreal territory when Bea Arthur, Art Carney, and Harvey Korman showed up. The special was so embarrassing that it only aired once.

Thank the Force someone was forward-thinking enough to record it so that future generations could revel in this pile of Wookiee poo.

At least it didn't start a trend of other ill-advised holiday specials based on '70s movies. Who would have tuned in to The Jaws Memorial Day Picnic Special or Rocky's Arbor Day Punching Extravaganza? Oh, right: We would have.

X-TINCTION RATING: Still going strong.

FUN FACT: The TV special found a second life passed around from nerd to nerd on videotape, and now it's being terrible on an ongoing basis on the Internet.


Now, thanks to the internet, that weird piece of Star Wars history remains in circulation and could for years to come, although knowing Disney, they're likely to start selling it for themselves. That holiday special offshoot featured Harvey Corman ("The Carol Burnett Show"), Art Carney ("The Honeymooners") and Bea Arthur ("Maude" and "The Golden Girls") among the guest stars (which really of made the Paul Lynde Halloween Special which I covered HERE or at http://goo.gl/ZCbtT look positively normal by comparison).

What About The Other LucasFilm Franchise: Indiana Jones?  It Will Also Continue

Without getting too far off topic, however, the Disney acquisition may also help to preserve another successful LucasFilm franchise, the Indiana Jones movies which starred Harrison Ford (the original Hans Solo from "Star Wars") although Mr. Ford has suggested he's done with playing Indy (he's older than Mr. Lucas, at age 70) but the Young Indiana Jones offshoot-series is likely be continued under Disney ownership.

We already know that Harrison Ford went on to become an even bigger Hollywood star with "Raiders of the Lost Arc" and 3 sequels to the Indiana Jones franchise, but what about the others (although truth be told, but the total number of characters in the collective "Star Wars" franchise exceeded 1,300, so aside from Chewbacca which is a character that could theoretically be played by almost anyone and a host of others, the other main actors in the film have surfaced in various capacities.

Notably, actress Carrie Fisher who played Princess Leia in the original film, has acted mostly on stage, although she appeared on a TV roast for Mr. Lucas and more recently, as a Jenny Craig weight loss system spokesperson.

What about the boy-wonder who played Luke Skywalker who gave up a recurring television series job in "Eight Is Enough" back in the seventies to do "Star Wars", specifically Mark Hamill?

Well, after 3 "Star Wars" films, he found himself completely typecast (it makes you wonder if, as an actor, he might have been better off taking the TV role on "Eight is Enough" which he was the first choice to play ... that role that went to Willie Ames instead ... OK, maybe Mark Hamill's decision was the right one after all!). However, typecasting aside, Mr. Hamill found meaningful employment as a voice artist doing cartoon voices. Sure, Mel Blanc he isn't, but it pays the bills, right?!

Anyway, this clip is also from Australia's 7 network (the same show I noted in my posts on the $6 Million Dollar Man's Lee Majors or http://goo.gl/QkLm9 or The Partridge Family's Shirley Jones or http://goo.gl/uVxDi), but this one happens to be on what's kept Mark Hamill busy in the last 35 years (although he has attended Comic-Con in the past). He also comments on how his knowledge of the film he starred in is nowhere near as detailed as some of the fans when it comes to trivia. In all, a pretty interesting update. That YouTube clip can be seen below, or by visiting http://youtu.be/396q-orFPzo: